22 Oct
2025
22 Oct
'25
12:53 p.m.
Hi Goffi!
Thanks for that PEP suggestion. I wonder if the use-case is indeed
simplified by using a PEP service for the domain itself: consumers of the
data would still need to perform an additional verification, right?
Instead of checking if the service advertises the serverinfo feature,
consumers need to verify that the service is a PEP-service for the domain
itself - which I think is basically done by checking for a _different_
feature?
Offering more than one way that 'opt-in' can be verified by a consumer
complicates implementations. That complexity could be 'solved' by mandating
exactly one of the options, but in that case the PEP solution is likely to
be least supported by current server implementations. I would favor the
existing option because of that.
As for the suggestion to switch to using the Clark notation for the new
disco/info field: In my reading XEP-0068 mandates it only for fields not
registered by the XSF itself. That doesn't apply to the field added by this
pubsub-serverinfo XEP. That doesn't mean that we _cannot_ use Clark
notation, of course, but what would be the benefit of moving to a Clark
notation? I don't think it does away with the awkwardness of having either
multiple XEP-0128-defined dataform-extensions, or merging them into
one. I'm not immediately seeing a benefit of using Clark notation here.
I love to hear your thoughts on this!
Kind regards,
Guus
On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 9:32 AM Goffi <goffi(a)goffi.org> wrote:
It’s also worth adding that it would make sense to
have a PEP service for
the
server itself (i.e., at `example.org` instead of `user(a)example.org`),
which
would simplify several use cases, including the XEP-0485 one. This would
avoid
the problem stated in § 7 Privacy Considerations:
The mere presence of an applicable pub-sub node
MUST NOT be used for
Service
Discovery purposes, as under common service
configuration,
non-administrative
users are allowed to create such nodes.
As with a PEP for the server itself, non-administrative users could not
create
anything.
This PEP for server itself idea was already proposed by Mathieu Pasquet
with
an earlier version of XEP-0455.
Best,
Goffi_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- standards(a)xmpp.org
To unsubscribe send an email to standards-leave(a)xmpp.org