[Standards] XEP-0384: Rejecting? [Was: Re: Proposed XMPP Extension: Ephemeral Messages]

Maxime Buquet pep at bouah.net
Thu Jan 2 15:05:17 UTC 2020

On 2020/01/02, Marvin W wrote:
> But this spontaneous "let's get rid of what many use in practice and
> what significantly boosted XMPPs popularity in the last years" without a
> proper replacement plan makes little sense to me.

I can only agree.

> > The bigger problem is the change by Daniel back in 2017, that changed
> > the specification to be based on the so-called Signal Protocol. It is
> > unclear to me if it is possible to implement OMEMO without libsignal
> > and/or in non-GPL implementations. If that is indeed not possible, it
> > violates one of the XSF Objectives set out in section 2 of XEP-0001:
> > 
> >   4. To guarantee that any person or entity can implement the protocols
> >      without encumbrance.
> > 
> > And thus, unless this restriction is somehow lifted, XEP-0384 cannot
> > progress within our standards process. Eventually rejecting it seems a
> > valid course of action to me, and I am not even sure if it can remain
> > Experimental or Deferred because of this.
> As mentioned before, we have a a number of Experimental XEPs that cannot
> be implemented due to lack of documentation. I don't see why the partial
> lack of non-GPL documentation is a bigger issue than the lack of any
> appropriate documentation.
> Nobody argues to propose the XEP for becoming a Draft (well Dave just
> did, but merely to bypass the rules).

I also agree that this is not entirely clear procedure-wise.

> > The earlier mentioned MLS effort at IETF specifies a new protocol based
> > on the Double Ratchet Algorithm, which would be free to implement for
> > everyone. Maybe we should put more effort in supporting this.
> Funny that you mention MLS. I am all for looking forward for MLS, but I
> am also pretty certain that the current state of MLS can not be fully
> implemented from its documentation (because it is not finished).

Also what I said. Maybe in 5 years we'll have a XEP and a few years
after we'd have imlementations.

Maxime “pep” Buquet
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20200102/62358d84/attachment.sig>

More information about the Standards mailing list