[Members] [Standards] Proposed XMPP Extension: Server to Server communication over STANAG 50666 ARQ

Goffi goffi at goffi.org
Thu Aug 27 09:07:59 UTC 2015


for what it worth I'm strongly opposed to any dependency to anything 
closed. A libre standard must be available free of charge, easily, 
without patent or royalties.

I have the same thing with the move to github: I'm OK with that (but not 
happy) because we don't need a github account to contribute, but if 
tomorrow I can't report a spec bug, or update my XEPs without a github 
account, it will definitely be a problem and the XSF would be failing it 
what is, in my opinion, one of its most important mission: keeping XMPP 
independent from patents, royalties, closed documentation or private 

I'm promoting a lot XMPP these days, and one of my main argument is "you 
can use it for free, you can study or adapt it, you can even fork it, 
it's a libre standard". How could I say after that "yes, but not this 
XEP, it depends on a closed standard" ?

For this special case I don't know the radio amateur world, but if there 
is a XEP, it should depend on a libre specs (if any). If somebody want 
to use it with a closed spec, nothing prevent to use the XEP as a basis, 
and adapt it for its proprietary stuff. If there is no libre alternative 
to STANAG 5066 (again I don't know at all this world), there should not 
be official XEP for that.


On 26/08/2015 17:58, Dave Cridland wrote:
> Folks,
> I've avoided voting on this because I want to seek some community input
> on it. Specifically, we (the XMP{P Standards Foundation) claim to be an
> Open Standards organization, and it's not clear if this submission
> qualifies because it has a dependency on STANAG 5066, which is not
> publicly available.
> STANAG 5066 is a physical layer protocol providing services roughly akin
> to IPX/SPX and V.90 combined. It's in use both in the Military world
> (it's a NATO specification) and also by commercial HF radio modems in
> use by amateur radio operators ("hams") worldwide.
> Many STANAG documents are available publicly in the NATO Standards
> Organisation's online document library, here:
> http://nso.nato.int/nso/nsdd/listpromulg.html - but STANAG 5066 is
> missing from this list.
> I'd like to make it clear that otherwise, I'm thoroughly in favour of this.
> Some parallel cases, which people may decide form a precedent (or may
> decide are completely different).
> 1) RTMP as a Jingle transport.
> RTMP is (or was) a multimedia realtime transport protocol developed by
> Adobe, and in use in the Flash Player. The Council rejected a submission
> to allow its use as a Jingle transport, on the basis that it was a
> closed standard.
> The minutes say:
> "Council consensus that it is inappropriate to publish this proposal
> given the proprietary nature of the RTMP technology on which this
> specification depends."
> STANAG 5066, although a STANdardization AGreement, is not publicly
> available, and therefore certainly doesn't form an "open standard".
> 2) SDN.801c in XEP-0258
> As a counter-example of sorts, implementing XEP-0258 in any useful form
> in a server requires the use of the document SDN.801c, which (similar to
> STANAG 5066) is an unclassified document which is not publicly available.
> However, XEP-0258 was, of course, published as a XEP - and indeed it's
> relatively simple to implement in a client, and its possible to
> implement a server which uses some other labelling model; arguably
> therefore SDN.801c is not a hard dependency in the same way.
> I could go either way on this; though my ideal outcome would be that
> STANAG 5066 gets put in the NATO public STANAG library alongside the others.
> Opinions welcome.
> Dave.
> On 24 August 2015 at 23:32, XMPP Extensions Editor <editor at xmpp.org
> <mailto:editor at xmpp.org>> wrote:
>     The XMPP Extensions Editor has received a proposal for a new XEP.
>     Title: Server to Server communication over STANAG 50666 ARQ
>     Abstract:
>        This specification defines operation over XMPP over the NATO
>     STANAG 5066 data link service for point to point links (ARQ).   This
>     enables optimized XMPP performance over HF Radio (which STANAG 5066
>     was designed for) and over other data links using STANAG 5066.
>     URL: http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/s2s-over-s5066.html
>     The XMPP Council will decide in the next two weeks whether to accept
>     this proposal as an official XEP.

More information about the Members mailing list