[Members] XSF roadmap

Tuomas Koski koski.tuomas at gmail.com
Wed Feb 23 03:54:47 CST 2011


Hi all,

On 23 February 2011 01:04, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter at stpeter.im> wrote:
> Catching up on another old old discussion thread.
>
> I've updated the roadmap page here:
>
> http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xsf-roadmap/

Good stuff.

Maybe we could add (if possible) couple of points to the list. My
first suggestion would be the "XMPP validation service at xmpp.org"
and the second pushing the "vCard4 standard" implementation. At least
at the last summit it seemed like people were interested to work with
those two topics too.


Cheers from grey Paris. Waiting for the spring.
--
tuomas




> /psa
>
> On 10/29/10 10:21 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> I'm sorry that I posted this kickoff message and then disappeared!
>> However, the discussion was excellent.
>>
>> Here is my summary. (These points are not in priority order.)
>>
>> a. Of course we need to finish revising the core specs. As you've
>> noticed if you're on the XMPP WG discussion list, we're not done yet.
>> I'm now in the middle of processing feedback from the IETF Security
>> Directorate (fun!). We might also receive feedback from the "General
>> Area Review Team". On November 8th I will post updated versions of the
>> three base specs. On December 2 the IESG is tentatively scheduled to
>> discuss these specs in its fortnightly telechat (and yes, we do have a
>> MUC room for the IESG!). That might result in further modifications. But
>> we are indeed making progress here. Oh, and thanks to the XSF members
>> who provided feedback in the XMPP WG, especially Kevin, Matthew, Dave,
>> Waqas, Jehan, Justin, and Florian Zeitz. Much appreciated!
>>
>> b. Folks here think end-to-end encryption is interesting and important,
>> but it's a long-term project. We need to keep plugging away (within the
>> XMPP WG) but it might take a while. BTW, I have contacted some of the
>> developers of off-the-record messaging (OTR) and it's possible I might
>> work with them to standardize their work at the IETF. But that is quite
>> preliminary.
>>
>> c. File transfer matters! I agree that we need to get this done. I
>> propose that we make this one of the main priorities for interop testing
>> at the XMPP Summit in Brussels next year. We also have some spec updates
>> to make, based on implementation feedback and a review by the Tech
>> Review Team. I've let this fall on the floor because of IETF work, but
>> I'll have much more time for this and other XEP efforts once the new
>> RFCs are published.
>>
>> d. Microblogging, social networking, PEP. I agree this can be a big
>> focus for us. We need more PEP deployment, someone to take over the
>> microblogging spec work (XEP-0270) and coordinate with StatusNet folks,
>> etc. Perhaps we can hold a joint session with the microblogging people
>> at FOSDEM?
>>
>> e. Security work / anti-spam / anti-abuse. Jehan pointed out that this
>> too is a long-term project. It's a never-ending arms race! But Dave
>> suggested that we need a better taxonomy of abusive behavior, and Nÿco
>> provided a brief summary. Perhaps we could expand that just a bit so
>> that we have a better idea of what we're trying to combat.
>>
>> f. Whiteboarding / collaborative editing. I think we have a pretty solid
>> basis here with SXE (XEP-0284), at least for small-scale environments,
>> but the spec needs a bit of attention and more implementations.
>>
>> g. I'm surprised that nobody mentioned improvements for mobility and
>> reliability. I think it would be really valuable to complete some
>> interop testing in Brussels for roster versioning (XEP-0237, now in
>> rfc3921bis), stream management (XEP-0198), and perhaps also SIFT (XEP-0273).
>>
>> h. MUC. XEP-0045 needs a thorough review, just as we did for PubSub last
>> year. I completed a review while flying to Brussels last year and still
>> haven't keyed in all the changes. :( But I'll have time to work on this
>> again after the RFCs are done. Another topic here is distributed or
>> federated MUC. We now have three proposals on that topic, and I would
>> love to settle on one approach in 2011.
>>
>> Well those are 8 different initiatives. Plenty to keep us busy! :)
>>
>> Further thoughts? What did I leave out?
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> On 9/7/10 1:09 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> http://xmpp.org/about-xmpp/xsf/xsf-roadmap/ provides a roadmap of
>>> technical topics the XSF wants to work on. That list is currently:
>>>
>>> 1. Finish revisions to RFCs 3920 and 3921
>>>
>>> 2. Define an end-to-end encryption technology for XMPP
>>>
>>> 3. Improve XMPP file transfer by transitioning to Jingle
>>>
>>> 4. Improve resistance to spam, phishing, abuse, and DoS attacks
>>>
>>> Here is my take on those:
>>>
>>> Task #1 is almost done.
>>>
>>> Task #2 is a longer-term project that folks will be working on in the
>>> XMPP WG (perhaps it doesn't even belong on the *XSF* roadmap, but I
>>> think it's helpful to list it). Now that #1 is done, I think we'll start
>>> to get serious about #2.
>>>
>>> Task #3 is also fairly far along -- we have implementation feedback that
>>> needs to be incorporated into the specs. Feel free to help out with that
>>> work.
>>>
>>> Task #4 is a good idea (see XEP-0268) but we don't have a lot of
>>> traction for it yet because we still don't see a lot of attacks on the
>>> network. Perhaps we need to push on this more forcefully.
>>>
>>> With the imminent completion of the RFC revisions, it's a good time to
>>> discuss other roadmap items. What do we need to be working on? What
>>> problems do we need to solve? I think it would be great for the XSF
>>> membership to discuss priorities so that we can come up with a good
>>> bundle of roadmap items for the next 12+ months, so please post to this
>>> list or edit this wiki page:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.xmpp.org/web/Roadmap
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>
>


More information about the Members mailing list