[Standards] Interoperability and Federation Re: Discussion venue Re: e2e privacy for XMPP Re: RFC 3923 (e2e with S/MIME) and OpenPGP

Andreas Kuckartz a.kuckartz at ping.de
Thu Nov 21 07:49:26 UTC 2013


Dave Cridland:
> Without interoperability, you might get functionality, but it'll be
> either a silo or a monoculture.
> 
> If it's a monoculture it won't stay that way - you'll end up with
> version drift - in which case you'll either need to figure out
> interoperability (hard to do in retrospect for a fracturing monoculture)
> or else eventually suffer functionality fracture.

That is the best concise explanation of the importance of
interoperability in distributed systems I have seen so far. Thanks!

The FSF seems to agree:

"We hope they all will be willing to work together to define ways to
inter-operate."
http://www.gnu.org/consensus/faq

And while I am mentioning GNU consensus, their FAQ states this:

"Isn't federation flawed? How can I trust a commodity server?

In that sense, yes. You can't trust a server controlled by a third
party. That's why we're looking at peer-to-peer solutions in the long
run, and promote user control of their data, and end-to-end, secure
solutions.

But not all use-cases require that amount of privacy. Federation makes a
lot of sense for affinity groups, public contents, and local
communities. We don't believe in one-size-fits-all."

Cheers,
Andreas



More information about the Standards mailing list