[Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0234 (Jingle File Transfer)

Kevin Smith kevin.smith at isode.com
Mon Dec 11 17:55:04 UTC 2017

On 29 Nov 2017, at 19:16, Jonas Wielicki (XSF Editor) <jonas at wielicki.name> wrote:
> This message constitutes notice of a Last Call for comments on
> XEP-0234.
> Title: Jingle File Transfer
> Abstract:
> This specification defines a Jingle application type for transferring
> a file from one entity to another. The protocol provides a modular
> framework that enables the exchange of information about the file to
> be transferred as well as the negotiation of parameters such as the
> transport to be used.
> URL: https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0234.html
> This Last Call begins today and shall end at the close of business on
> 2017-12-12.
> Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send
> your feedback to the standards at xmpp.org discussion list:
> 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol
> stack or to clarify an existing protocol?


> 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction
> and requirements?


> 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not,
> why not?


> 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification?

Other than the escaping nit below, no.

> 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written?

"Alternatively to a <hash/> element, the initiator can also include a <hash-used/> element. This avoids the need to read the file twice to calculate the hash.”

We should probably mention that hash-used is also 300.

For the ‘name’ attribute of the description, it seems that we might be requiring escaping of things that the other entity gives special handling, but that we don’t. How would we tell?

Currently we have ICE-TCP as a SHOULD. Is that sensible? Does it reflect reality?


More information about the Standards mailing list