> - I'm a bit uncomfortable with the text about encryption. "Both node items
> MUST be end-to-end encrypted", but then goes on to loosely recommend one
> method, and add a MAY that something that isn't a MUST or SHOULD might
> change in the future. Does this need either one MUST/SHOULD mechanism to
> enable compatible implementations, or a metadata layer to inform the client
> of the mechanism?

The contacts MUST be e2e encrypted, it the raison d'être of this specification.
The rest just open the door to a future better encryption method, so we don't
stay forever blocked on OX for pubsub. We have namespaces to deal with that, I
don't see we need much more. Maybe the formulation can be improved, but the
idea is to say that e2ee is mandatory, and that we have a method right now the
must be used as long as there is no better alternative, and the door is open
for better algorithm is any in the future.