[Standards] Fwd: 2015-12-09 Meeting Minutes

Dave Cridland dave at cridland.net
Wed Dec 9 16:48:09 UTC 2015


Sam,

To repeat what I said in the Council MUC: Thanks for these minutes; they're
really excellent, and greatly appreciated.

Dave.

On 9 December 2015 at 16:42, Sam Whited <sam at samwhited.com> wrote:

> FYI
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Sam Whited <sam at samwhited.com>
> Date: Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:40 AM
> Subject: 2015-12-09 Meeting Minutes
> To: council at xmpp.org
>
>
> # 2015-12-09 Council Meeting
>
> Logs: http://logs.xmpp.org/council/2015-12-09/#16:00:10
>
> ## Roll call
>
> - Lance
> - Dave
> - PSA
> - Tobias
> - MattJ
>
>
> ## ProtoXEP Message Attaching: Accept as Experimental
>
> http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/attachto.html
>
>   - +1 MattJ
>   - +1 Lance
>   - +1 psa
>   - +1 Tobias
>   - +1 Dave
>
>
> ## ProtoXEP Quality of Service: Accept as Experimental
>
> http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/qos.html
>
>   - -1 Dave
>   - -1 MattJ
>   - -1 Lance
>   - Tobias on list
>
>   - PSA notes that ensuring exactly once delivery is hard
>   - MattJ notes that MQTT does it, but is not federated
>
>
> ## ProtoXEP SRV records for XMPP over TLS: Accept as Experimental
>
> http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/tls-srv.html
>
>   - +1 Dave
>   - +1 Lance
>   - +1 PSA
>   - +1 Tobias
>   - +1 MattJ
>
>   - Lance notes that it's "in that awkward spot between XEP [and] RFC"
>   - PSA notes that SASL and STARTTLS started as XEPs and then became RFCs
>
>
> ## ProtoXEP Multi-User Chat Light: Accept as Experimental
>
> http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/muc-light.html
>
>   - MattJ on list
>   - Tobias on list
>   - PSA on list
>   - Dave on list
>   - Lance on list
>
>   - Dave notes that it's a minimalist MUC implementation not based on
> PubSub that
>     rejects presence entirely rather than making it optional (and is
> leaning
>     towards -1)
>   - Lance notes that it requires roster items for rooms to be in a
> particular
>     group
>
>
> ## XEP-0138: Update to 2.1
>
> https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/100
>
>   - +1 Tobias
>   - +1 PSA
>   - +1 MattJ (pending links and better explanation of chosen plaintext
> attacks)
>
>   - Dave notes that not returning the original stanza in errors would
> probably do
>     the same thing
>   - Sam wonders if it should be worth withdrawing the PR and waiting on a
> more
>     comprehensive review of 0138?
>     - PSA notes that he's been saying that all along
>     - MattJ agrees
>
> Action item:
>
>   - Identify who is qualified to do a security audit of XEP-0138
>
> ## Move XEP-0301 to Final
>
> - +1 Dave
> - PSA wonders if their are fixes on the way, Lance tables discussion until
> next
>   week
>
> ## Date of next
>
> SBTSBC?
>
>   - MattJ: nwwfm
>   - Tobias: wfm
>
> Aside: Note taker is confused and doesn't know what any of this means.
>
> ## AOB
>
> None
>
> --
> Sam Whited
> pub 4096R/54083AE104EA7AD3
> https://blog.samwhited.com
> _______________________________________________
> Standards mailing list
> Info: http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards
> Unsubscribe: Standards-unsubscribe at xmpp.org
> _______________________________________________
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20151209/cafb1590/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list