[Council] meeting agenda, 2007-02-14

[Ian Paterson]

Hi,

You can look at the HTML versions here (even with Firefox):

http://www.clientside.co.uk/xeps/xep-0124/xep-0124.html

http://www.clientside.co.uk/xeps/xep-0206/xep-0206.html

- Ian


Ian Paterson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Those XEPs are final now. You can look at them using IE here (if you 
> have a Windows machine):
>
> http://www.clientside.co.uk/xeps/xep-0124/xep-0124.xml
>
> Multiple clarifications and restructuring without changes to protocol 
> itself; changed title to BOSH; added section that fully explores the 
> technique underlying the protocol; separated XMPP-specific features 
> into new XEP-0206; added optional new Script Syntax and session 
> pauses; added from and ver attributes; added hold attribute to session 
> creation response; clarified polling too-frequently error; recommended 
> clients use HTTP Pipelining.
>
>
> http://www.clientside.co.uk/xeps/xep-0206/xep-0206.xml
>
> Initial version (extracted from XEP-0124 version 0.15); depricated 
> non-SASL authentication and authid attribute; multiple clarifications 
> and restructuring without changes to protocol itself; added optional 
> version and restart attributes
>
>
> Peter, XEP-0124 is already in the CVS and XEP-0206 can be downloaded 
> from the URL above.
>
>
> I'm going to start work on BOAH now. It's similar to BOSH but based on 
> the Comet technique.
>
> - Ian
>
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In the interests of making XEP-0124 into an IETF standard, I've split 
>> it into two documents. XEP-0124 is now a generic XML streaming 
>> protocol (renamed to "BOSH"), while the proto-XEP  (nominally called 
>> XEP-0206 - XMPP over BOSH) includes a couple of XMPP-specific 
>> extensions and a clarification of the best practices.
>>
>> These documents are complete rewrites, but almost all the changes 
>> were for clarity (XEP-0124 wasn't a nice document). The few changes 
>> are 100% backward compatible, with the possible exception of the 
>> xmpp:restart attribute which enables SASL auth (which was not 
>> correctly supported properly under the previous version of the 
>> protocol).
>>
>> - Ian
>
>