[standards-jig] Essence of Jabber

Dave dave at dave.tj
Thu Mar 7 01:17:57 UTC 2002


Besides, not everybody needs (or _wants_) SSL, anyway.  I don't think
something that most people don't have any plans to use should be a
requirement for a protocol.  We can always make a JabberS protocol,
and have guidelines about what's required for JabberS certification,
or whatever.  (Honestly, I was reminded of the question of "Is an
OS an OS if it doesn't have a browser?" when I saw that tidbit about
possibly requiring SSL for something to be considered a Jabber program.
There's nothing in the requirements of an OS that entails inclusion of
a browser, and there's nothing in the requirements of an IM app that
entails inclusion of encrypted communications channels.  Furthermore,
there are other ways of browsing the Internet with an OS, and there are
other ways of encrypting Jabber communications (e.g. IPSec, IPv6, SSL,
etc. - none of which are required for simple message exchange).)

Just my penny pair,
Dave Cohen <email/JID:dave at dave.tj>


Julian Missig wrote:
> 
> SSL connections are currently experimental and not well defined. I
> definitely do not think SSL compatibility is required for something to have
> absolute base Jabber support.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shawn Wilton" <shawn at black9.net>
> To: <standards-jig at jabber.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, 06 March, 2002 19:58
> Subject: RE: [standards-jig] Essence of Jabber
> 
> 
> > Honestly, I think ssl compatible connections should be required.  We
> should
> > put forth some effort to provide a more secure service.  Do they have to
> > turn it on, no.  But if you wanna talk compliance, then it should be
> forced
> > for inclusion in a product.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig
> 




More information about the Standards mailing list