[Foundation] thoughts from another commercial player

Ryan Eatmon reatmon at jabber.org
Fri Jul 11 10:27:35 CDT 2003


Matt Tucker <matt at jivesoftware.com> said:

> Obviously the IETF seems to be working out well for the core XMPP 
> protocol. However, that doesn't cover everything that one needs for a 
> full IM system. What about file transfer, encryption, message events, 
> pubsub, etc, etc? We do need a standards body for that. One thing we 
> could decide as a community is that we just try to push every single 
> important XMPP extension through the IETF and use that as our only 
> standards process. However, that seems a bit heavy-weight and slow to 
> me. As has been discussed rather strongly recently, we need a standard 
> file transfer protocol yesterday!


The IETF is working well for the core XMPP protocol.  And yes it does not
implement a full IM system.  Which is why Jabber exists.  It uses the XMPP
core protocol (much like a web site uses HTTP) and implements all of the
things that you are talking about.  XMPP is ONLY the core protocol.  So to
stop using the name of Jabber which defines a full IM system would be a
mistake.  I am 100% against removing the name and use of Jabber from the JSF.



-- 
Ryan Eatmon
reatmon at jabber.org





More information about the Members mailing list