[Standards] C2C TLS
dave at cridland.net
Tue Nov 25 13:41:11 UTC 2008
On Tue Nov 25 13:03:15 2008, Jonathan Schleifer wrote:
> I also like the fact that you don't try to use a direct connection,
> which has the known problems, which many just ignored in the
> previous discussion.
Actually, it's not that the problems are ignored, they're simply
punted. XEP-0247 simply says "Hey, we'll negotiate something that
works", and avoids the entire issue, by design. This is a good thing.
We're hoping that technologies like ICE-TCP and other transport layer
solutions will be developed. This seems pretty reasonable - I'm not
convinced by ICE-TCP itself, but we're not tied to TCP, just a
reliably ordered stream, which makes life rather simpler. (FWIW, I
suspect we could use ICE to setup two-way UDP communications and
layer a reliability layer on that - in fact, I think it's been done).
What any sane person would realise is that XMPP expertise won't help
there at all, and that a good design would allow these additional
technologies to be designed by others, and simply slotted in
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave at cridland.net - xmpp:dwd at dave.cridland.net
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade
More information about the Standards