[standards-jig] Essence of Jabber

Shawn Wilton shawn at black9.net
Thu Mar 7 01:32:39 UTC 2002


Reply inline:

 - Shawn


Shawn Wilton wrote:
>
> How is ssl only experimental?  I've been using it for months.  As for
> definition, it's a difference between connections.  There's no definition
> needed.
Just because you've been using something for months, that doesn't mean
it has to be required for our standard :-(

-I was trying to indicate that it shouldn't be considered experimental since
I've been using it for months, not that it should be included for such a
reason.

> Instead of putting the bar as low as possible it has to be raised to some
> degree.  Otherwise jabber is just a carbon copy of everything else out
> there.
The bar shouldn't be any higher than necessary to fulfill Jabber's
purpose: Jabber is _not_ intended to be the killer app to end all killer
apps, incorperating everything but emacs; it's intended to be the killer
protocol for IM.  Loading it up with unnecessary fat will just make our
killer protocol more and more bloated :-(

-There's little bloat associated with SSL.  Also, if we're going to include
an encryption namespace, it would make sense to include SSL for plain text
conversations.  Especially since not everyone can support GPG, or PGP.
Quite true it's not a killer app.  I would agree 100% there.  As for being a
killer protocol, I don't see how it's all that much different from msn,
yahoo, or aim for that matter as of right now.  Except for the fact we use
xml and they use a binary protocol.  And the fact that you can
*occasionally* talk to people on other networks.  But even that seems to
work rarely unless you're on a secluded server.


>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: standards-jig-admin at jabber.org
> [mailto:standards-jig-admin at jabber.org]On Behalf Of Julian Missig
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 5:05 PM
> To: standards-jig at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [standards-jig] Essence of Jabber
>
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> Standards-JIG mailing list
> Standards-JIG at jabber.org
> http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig
>

_______________________________________________
Standards-JIG mailing list
Standards-JIG at jabber.org
http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/standards-jig




More information about the Standards mailing list