Hi all,

At the recent Summit, we had a long and nuanced discussion about the state of the XMPP RFCs and whether there is value in updating parts of them, potentially through the IETF, to better reflect how XMPP is actually implemented and used today.

To be clear upfront: This is not a proposal to start an IETF working group, nor a commitment to produce new RFCs. The discussion at the Summit surfaced enough open questions that it seems worthwhile to first have a focused scoping and feasibility discussion.

Some of the motivations that were raised:

• The current RFCs do not describe a baseline that results in interoperable modern implementations
• Discoverability for new implementers is difficult (knowing which XEPs are "essential")
• The IM landscape has changed significantly since the original RFCs
• External review and feedback could be valuable
• There may be marketing and positioning benefits, but these are secondary

At the same time, many concerns were raised:

• The sheer amount of work required, and whether we realistically have the manpower
• Risk of scope creep (e.g., baking too much into RFCs)
• Loss of flexibility compared to the XEP process
• Fear of starting something we cannot finish
• Unclear interaction with compliance suites and the "living standard" nature of XMPP
• Potential pushback or distraction from other IETF efforts (e.g., MIMI)

Questions that seem worth discussing at this stage:

• Is it useful to think about updating some RFCs (e.g., core, IM), while leaving the rest to XEPs?
• What would be clearly in-scope vs out-of-scope?
• Is there enough interest and capacity to justify exploring this further?
• What would be a sensible first step that does not overcommit us?

If you were at the Summit and felt strongly one way or the other, it would be great to hear your perspective here. If you weren't, fresh viewpoints are equally welcome.