[Standards] Veto on "Privileged Entity"

Kurt Zeilenga kurt.zeilenga at isode.com
Wed Dec 17 17:10:07 UTC 2014

I’m glad this thread seems now to be focused more Dave’s concerns with the ProtoXEP itself and how the authors might cure these concerns than discussions of general XMPP access control issues.  I’m going to try focus all my comments on the ProtoXEP itself, your specific concerns of it, and what you are asking authors to do.  And I’m also going to try to look at all of this “anew”.

> It'd be simpler if the protocol was just limited to the immediate requirement.

Maybe that’s suggests a path forward… maybe if the authors would add an narrowly worded applicability statement to the ProtoXEP to the immediate requirement possibly with a note that upon further experimentation and operational experience the scope might be broaden subsequently.

— Kurt

More information about the Standards mailing list