Hi folks,
I've been brainstorming a mechanism for offline history transfer (i.e.
one client fetches the offline message history from another client). For
that, an encrypted direct client-to-client XML channel would be neat.
1. Are direct client-to-client XML channels a thing?
I found XEP-0247 [1], which looks alright on first read-through but is
deferred since 2010. Does someone more familiar with the topic know why
the XEP was abandoned and whether it could realistically be revived or
if there is a better alternative now?
2. Are encrypted direct client-to-client channels a thing?
There is JET [2], but it seems to focus on key negotiation (which I
would do differently) and file transfers, which I don't need either. I
don't see how a bidirectional data channel/stream would be encrypted
using JET.
There's also a XEP called jingle-xtls [3] in the Inbox, but it's even
more abandoned than XEP-0247 and also seems to focus mostly on the key
negotiation, which again I would do differently.
Next to these questions I would be interested in the general sentiment
and ideas for workarounds (e.g. "p2p is cursed, just send encrypted
stanzas via the server as usual" or "just use a simple binary format and
don't bother with a fully fledged XML stream").
Thanks :D
Tim
[1] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0247.html
[2] https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0391.html
[3] https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/jingle-xtls.html
Hello!
Section 9.4 of XEP-0045 Multi-User Chat defines XMPP interaction when a
member of a room gets their membership removed. In the last few lines of
the section, the section describes how, in a members-only room, the
affected user is to be removed from the room.
Why does example 128 "Service Removes Non-Member" contain two stanzas
(their difference only being a 'actor' element)? See
https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0045.html#example-128
Kind regards,
Guus
Hello!
XEP-0045 Multi-User Chat, section 9.2 defines that the ban list is always
based on a user's bare JID (in the first paragraph).
That same section also defines a matching order (in the last paragraph) in
which items with a full JID are explicitly included.
This seems to contradict each other. Am I misunderstanding this part of the
specification?
Assuming that full JID values aren't to be used on a ban-list, should the
matching order as defined in the XEP be modified to not refer to full JIDs?
Kind regards,
Guus
Hello!
XEP-0045 Section 9.1 defines that:
- a user cannot be banned by an admin with a lower affiliation.
- if an admin or owner attempts to ban himself, the service MUST deny the
request.
Section 9.2, that deals with modifying the ban list of a room (potentially
applying changes that affect more than one participant) does not mention
these cases. It stands to reason that similar definitions must apply.
To me, this raises the question of dealing with ban list modification
requests that contain both 'valid' as well as 'invalid' modifications. I do
not believe that the XEP clearly specifies how to deal with these. I would
think that the entire request is to be rejected (as opposed to only the
'valid' modifications' be applied). Can we add this explicitly in the XEP?
Kind regards,
Guus
Version 0.1.2 of XEP-0491 (WebXDC) has been released.
Abstract:
This document defines an XMPP protocol extension to communicate WebXDC
widgets and their state updates.
Changelog:
* Suggest what to use for selfAddr
* Add acknowledgements (spw)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0491.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.
Version 0.4.2 of XEP-0440 (SASL Channel-Binding Type Capability) has
been released.
Abstract:
This specification allows servers to annouce their supported SASL
channel-binding types to clients.
Changelog:
* Add an XML schema.
* Mention that this specification does add a new namespace that should
go to the registrar.
* Fix indentation, typos, misuse of '' vs. </> for elements, etc.
(egp)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0440.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.
Version 0.2.0 of XEP-0484 (Fast Authentication Streamlining Tokens)
has been released.
Abstract:
This specification defines a token-based method to streamline
authentication in XMPP, allowing fully authenticated stream
establishment within a single round-trip.
Changelog:
* Added an XML Schema.
* Fixed text where 'count' was assumed to be an element, not an
attribute.
* Fixed indentation in a few examples. (egp)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0484.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.
Version 0.1.0 of XEP-0492 (Chat notification settings) has been
released.
Abstract:
This document defines an XMPP protocol extension to synchronise per-
chat notification settings across different clients.
Changelog:
* Promoted to Experimental (XEP Editor: dg)
URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0492.html
Note: The information in the XEP list at https://xmpp.org/extensions/
is updated by a separate automated process and may be stale at the
time this email is sent. The XEP documents linked herein are up-to-
date.