[standards-jig] Essence of Jabber

Julian Missig julian at jabber.org
Thu Mar 7 02:45:33 UTC 2002


But that doesn't mean that something cannot be called "Jabber" if it
does not support SSL. I use Jabber all the time without SSL. If SSL is a
requirement, then any jabberd compiled without SSL support (such as the
one on jabber.org right now) is not Jabber compliant.

On Wed, 2002-03-06 at 21:09, Shawn Wilton wrote:
> I wouldnt' consider encryption to be a gimmick.  And when you start to
> consider that the most likely users of a stripped down version of jabber
> will be wireless devices and hand helds, I think encryption becomes
> extremely important.  Especially when you don't have the "security" of
> wires.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: standards-jig-admin at jabber.org
> [mailto:standards-jig-admin at jabber.org]On Behalf Of Dave
> Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 6:04 PM
> To: standards-jig at jabber.org
> Subject: Re: [standards-jig] Essence of Jabber
> 
> 
> LOL ... in my haste to point out my luck with jabberd, I forgot to
> point out that XML vs. binary, open vs. closed architecture, distributed
> vs. centralized, and extendable vs. rigidly controlled are the primary
> features of Jabber.  We really don't need "built-in encryption" or
> some other gimmik to help distiguish us from all the other balmovement
> out there.
> 
> Dave Cohen <email/JID:dave at dave.tj>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-- 
email: julian at jabber.org
jabber:julian at jabber.org




More information about the Standards mailing list