[Standards] Council Minutes 2020-02-26
teddsterr at outlook.com
Sun Mar 1 01:12:18 UTC 2020
1) Roll Call
Present: Jonas, Zash, Daniel, Georg, Dave
2) Agenda Bashing
There's probably nothing to add. Georg thinks that future agendas need to be shorter.
3) Editor's Update
* ProtoXEP: Extended Channel Search
* Expired calls: CFE on XEP-0198, CFE on XEP-0368, LC on XEP-0398
* Calls in progress:
- LC: XEP-0402 (PEP Native Bookmarks), ends: 2020-03-03
- CFE: XEP-0066 (Out of Band Data), ends: 2020-03-10
- LC: XEP-0429 (Special Interests Group End to End Encryption), ends: 2020-03-10
4a) Advance XEP-0398 (User Avatar to vCard-Based Avatars Conversion) - https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0398.html
Jonas would like to see changes to Security Considerations before this progresses; and since normative language needs to be modified, it's better to handle that in Experimental. Georg mentions that some PEP questions came up, so it would make sense to consider those first - the author, Daniel, is fine with updating the PEP stuff on short notice; hoping to restart this process next week.
Jonas: -1 (not rejection, but back to Experimental, so someone™ can fix things)
Zash: -1 (agree with Jonas)
Dave: -1 (for the reasons stated by others)
4b) Advance XEP-0198 (Stream Management) - https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0198.html
Georg is unsure, but it's doing its job, expect for the unclear resume host connection mechanism.
Dave noted a comment on s2s, possibly from MattJ, which he has yet to consider, but s2s is under-specified at best.
Jonas doesn't think it's possible to move forward if there are zero s2s implementations; Dave doesn't think any were explicitly mentioned, which would itself be a procedural reason for not advancing.
Zash mentions that mod_smacks for Prosody does support XEP-0198 in s2s, though not resumption, and it's disabled by default - Dave thinks it's unclear what resumption would do for s2s.
Jonas: [on-list] (yet to catch up on the thread)
Daniel: -1 (people have brought up valid, but fixable, concerns)
Zash: -1 (haven't read that thread yet)
Dave: -1 (lack of clarity on s2s implementations)
4c) Advance XEP-0368 (SRV records for XMPP over TLS) - https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0368.html
Travis Burtrum promised to make some changes to XEP-0368, mostly clerical, and changing a SHOULD to a MAY.
Jonas: -1 (changes need to be made)
Georg: -1 (liked the proposed wording)
Daniel: [on-list] (not caught up on that)
Dave: -1 (take Travis's promise to mean "update coming")
Georg thinks leaving this to clients is good, because prioritising DirectTLS over STARTSSL will add an extra RTT with servers lacking DirectTLS SRV records. Dave is also unclear on ALPN implementation.
4d) Proposed XMPP Extension: Extended Channel Search - https://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/extended-channel-search.html
Georg has some issues, mainly regarding discovery of whether the service is a local search for the given host domain or a proxy - the author, Jonas, intends to fix these issues in Experimental.
4e) Authorship of XEP-0044 (Full Namespace Support for XML Streams) - https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0044.html
Jonas would like to take authorship, polish it, add namespaced attributes and a stream feature, and bring it back on Track; is attempting to contact the author.
5) Outstanding Votes
Zash votes +1 on Trust Messages.
6) Date of Next
2020-03-04 1600 UTC
Jonas might be late due to a meeting, and must leave on time for burgers; so it would be great if someone volunteered to chair (everyone eyes Dave expectantly.)
Georg won't be here.
Dave notes that in XEP-0001 it says a specification needs two implementations in order to move to Final, however it's not clear whether that means every optional part also needs to be implemented, nor is it clear whether this could be one client and one server. Dave has always assumed we demand the same levels as the IETF, that is, two client and two server implementations covering all optional parts; asks whether anyone considers this important enough to be properly specified in XEP-0001, or if they have views - Daniel thinks it sounds sensible, as does Jonas; Georg thinks it's a good idea and Somebody™ should make it happen.
Pep expects this to mean that Pubsub and MUC will never reach Final - Dave thinks it would mean the odd bits nobody implements are either removed, or at least moved to a different XEP.
Daniel doesn't think the number of implementations is an issue in practice - Dave agrees and thinks specifications are either widely implemented or not at all.
Jonas supports making this clear and adhering to IETF standards.
Editor asks Dave for a reminder, upon preparing a patch for XEP-0001, to update the CFE template to specifically ask about parts left out of the implementation.
Dave takes this as consensus that he will write some text, get agreement on lists, and prepare a patch for XEP-0001 and the CFE template; Jonas notes it will need to be sanctioned by Board.
Georg shuffles his AOBs before stashing them away for next week, as is tradition.
Jonas requests Council members read and potentially advance the "Meta-Discussion about the Standards Process" thread .
Jonas thanks all; all thank Jonas.
Jonas concludes by performing the Rite of ᚦᚨᚾᚲᛏᛖᛞ, in the hopes of summoning minutes; nobody is quite sure of the origin, but nobody dare question it either.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Standards