June 2025 - Standards

LAST CALL: XEP-0424 (Message Retraction)
by Daniel Gultsch 03 Jul '26

03 Jul '26

This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0424. Title: Message Retraction Abstract: This specification defines a method for indicating that a message should be retracted. URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0424.html This Last Call begins today and shall end at the close of business on 2025-01-06. Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send your feedback to the standards(a)xmpp.org discussion list: 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to clarify an existing protocol? 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and requirements? 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, why not? 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification? 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written? Your feedback is appreciated!

9 27

LAST CALL: XEP-0484 (Fast Authentication Streamlining Tokens)
by Daniel Gultsch 13 Dec '25

13 Dec '25

This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0484. Title: Fast Authentication Streamlining Tokens Abstract: This specification defines a token-based method to streamline authentication in XMPP, allowing fully authenticated stream establishment within a single round-trip. URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0484.html This Last Call begins today and shall end at the close of business on 2025-01-27. Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send your feedback to the standards(a)xmpp.org discussion list: 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to clarify an existing protocol? 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and requirements? 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, why not? 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification? 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written? Your feedback is appreciated!

6 20

LAST CALL: XEP-0440 (SASL Channel-Binding Type Capability)
by Daniel Gultsch 24 Oct '25

24 Oct '25

This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on XEP-0440. Title: SASL Channel-Binding Type Capability Abstract: This specification allows servers to annouce their supported SASL channel-binding types to clients. URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0440.html This Last Call begins today and shall end at the close of business on 2024-05-20. Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send your feedback to the standards(a)xmpp.org discussion list: 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol stack or to clarify an existing protocol? 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and requirements? 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, why not? 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification? 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written? Your feedback is appreciated!

9 30

XEP-0001 Changes to reflect current practice wrt XEP Authors
by Dave Cridland 06 Aug '25

06 Aug '25

Hey hey, Boring incoming: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1407 This is draft to avoid the XSF Board accidentally approving it before the community has had a chance to discuss. The main change is the paragraph added in Section 6 (Discussion Process), covering changes to the XEP during Experimental: The XEP author incorporates the feedback by creating source control patches > (such as Pull Requests), in line with the preferred method in &xep0143;. > Direct changes to an Experimental XEP, such as a contributor providing a > patch (or Pull Request on GitHub), are still the responsibility of the XEP > author, and are only applied if the XEP author agrees. If a XEP has > multiple authors, while agreement is sought from all authors, only those > opinions from responsive authors are considered. If the Approving Body > feels that the XEP author is not responsive, another author may be added > unilaterally by the Approving Body. This is trying to do two things: 1) Document the existing practice that the XMPP Council has followed, whereby changes to Experimental XEPs need "agreement" (PR approval, or similar) from the XEP Author. 2) Document the existing practice that the XMPP Council has followed. whereby if a XEP Author isn't responsive (ie, doesn't respond to emails, etc) the XMPP Council can add a new XEP Author. 3) Document the *new practice* that if a contribution isn't a PR, it's the XEP Author who is responsible to turn it into one. The rest of the changes surface and restate existing process/policy/URLs and aren't that interesting (well, even less interesting). There is one additional possible process deviation we should document (or call the Process Police out, or something). Submission of a XEP, as per XEP-0143, occurs via email tot he Editor. Is this really still the case? Or are these now by PR? That'll need changing in XEP-0143, which I'm happy to do if that's the case. It'd be nice to have a non-PR variant of the process (post here?) Dave.

6 17

Situation of DOAP
by Schimon Jehudah 25 Jul '25

25 Jul '25

Good evening. I am working on a Python script which generates an Atom Syndication Format XML feed from XMPP DOAP files. I will further add to it an XSLT stylesheet to transform it to XHTML. I have attached that script, for those who are inqusitive about it. Problems -------- However, I did notice, that some DOAP files are not updated, and some are missing information. Proposal -------- I would suggest to add attributes for types of links (i.e. Gemini, HTTP, PubSub, etc.), because in near future, resources such as homepage, bug-database, developer-forum, developer-support, etc. will be hosted on PubSub services over XMPP, instead of HTTP. Question -------- Is there an automated DOAP generator software or service? Conclusion ---------- If there is no automated service yet, then I would create an XHTML software with forms that would do so. Afterwards, I would also create an XMPP service with Data Forms for that purpose. Please advise. Kindly, Schimon

1 1

Proposed XMPP Extension: Data Policy
by Daniel Gultsch 02 Jul '25

02 Jul '25

The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP. Title: Data Policy Abstract: This document specifies metadata on how an entity handles its data (encryption, data retention, etc). URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/data_policy.html The Council will decide in the next two weeks whether to accept this proposal as an official XEP.

4 11

Proposed XMPP Extension: Data Forms File Input Element
by Daniel Gultsch 02 Jul '25

02 Jul '25

The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP. Title: Data Forms File Input Element Abstract: This specification defines an element which can be used with data forms to let users upload one or more files. URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/data-form-file-element.html The Council will decide in the next two weeks whether to accept this proposal as an official XEP.

3 2

XEP-0317: Hats, Update and complete the protocol
by Timothée Jaussoin 02 Jul '25

02 Jul '25

A few weeks ago I made an important pull request to complete, fix and update the XEP-0317: Hats. https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/1437 This PR included the following changes: * Specify a urn:xmpp:hats:commands:dcreate command to add a hat to the available list * Specify a urn:xmpp:hats:commands:ddestroy command to destroy a hat from the list * Clarify how the service should broadcast the hat changes when it is edited, assigned, removed or destroyed * Specify a way for an entity to get the complete list of hats using a hash in disco#info * Add a hue optional parameter allowing entities to assign a color to the hat that can be displayed properly in any conditions on the client (as explained in XEP-0392: Consistent Color Generation) * Standardize all the form fields using XEP-0068 * Fix some typos I tried to reach the authors without success so I'm trying again using the mailing list. I'd really like to move it forward then we can start implementing them in our clients and servers. Regards, edhelas

3 4

XEP-0461 feedback: multi-message replies
by Greatsword 30 Jun '25

30 Jun '25

I've seen some IM platforms (namely Revolt and Guilded) have the ability to let the user reference multiple messages in a single reply, which might be a useful feature. I think with the XEP as it currently is, it could be fairly simple to add support for this feature. I think an addition like this would be good. """ Section 3.2 - Multi-Message Replies A user may want to reply to multiple messages with a single message. This can be done by including many reply elements. Ordering is important, so the reply element MUST include an "arrangement" attribute that counts up from 0, with 0 being displayed at the top in the client UI. EXAMPLE 5. Yuri replies to both Max's and Anna's messages in a MUC. ``` <message to='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org' from='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org/anna' id='groupchat-id1' type='groupchat'> <stanza-id xmlns='urn:xmpp:sid:0' id='groupchat-id1' /> <body>A fort will keep us safe!</body> </message> <message to='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org' from='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org/max' id='groupchat-id2' type='groupchat'> <stanza-id xmlns='urn:xmpp:sid:0' id='groupchat-id2' /> <body>Adoring blue flags for style!</body> </message> <message to='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org' from='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org/yuri' id='groupchat-id3' type='groupchat'> <stanza-id xmlns='urn:xmpp:sid:0' id='groupchat-id3' /> <body>Excellent ideas! Let's get right to it!</body> <reply to='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org/anna' id='groupchat-id1' arrangement='0' xmlns='urn:xmpp:reply:0' /><reply to='knightsguild(a)muc.example.org/max' id='groupchat-id2' arrangement='1' xmlns='urn:xmpp:reply:0' /> </message> ``` A fallback for this would work in the same way as the previous section, the main difference is that the fallback would include all referenced messages. """ I think it also might be worth considering having some kind of limiter in how many messages can be referenced by one reply - perhaps MUCs that advertise support for replies could indicate in a data form how many references may be one message, and if clients don't self-enforce this, then the MUC could throw a policy violation error and drop the message.

4 8

Enhancing privacy for BoB messages (XEP-0231)
by Schimon Jehudah 26 Jun '25

26 Jun '25

Good day. I would want to discuss the possibility and best practice of creating server-side modules that would copy BoB data (XEP-0231: Bits of Binary) to own server in order to avoid exposure of IP address of the receiver. Kind regards, Schimon

6 11