[Members] Civil Disobedience

Bart van Bragt jabber at vanbragt.com
Wed Aug 24 11:13:24 CDT 2005


Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> They want to 
> get IM federation right. If that means developing some policies around 
> server-to-server interconnection -- e.g., use TLS only and require that 
> the other side have a non-self-signed certificate (perhaps using CAcert 
> if we can get more people on board with that) -- then I think that makes 
> sense. Google is taking a deliberate approach to federation and I see no 
> reason to punish them for it.
Is this something you heard from Google or speculation? If speculation; 
would you be so kind as to ask them what their plans/problems are 
regarding federation, spam control and getting an open network? We can 
discuss these matters for hours and hours but the bottomline is that we 
currently don't know what Google wants or expects. It would be nice to 
get some info from them so these discussions can become a bit more 
constructive :) I really, really want to believe in the good intentions 
of Google but the main problem is that large corporations are not known 
for their openness when it comes to future plans. Same with Apple, they 
are doing lots of neat stuff but Peter seems to be the only one that has 
been talking to some engineers. The engineers are not allowed to discuss 
their plans/work on mailinglists like this :\

Anyway. Let's hope that this is all going to have a happy end (or 
beginning :D). That Google has built a service based on XMPP is _very_ 
good news we have been waiting for this for years :) Now let's hope that 
we can make all this into something even better than it already is. Also 
looking forward to the publication of their VoIP protocol. From what I 
heard it's very good at piercing firewalls (but I wouldn't be surprised 
if it would route everything through talk.google.com).

Bart


More information about the Members mailing list