Re: [Standards] XEPs 246 + 247 (end-to-end streams)
Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > On 5/6/09 9:32 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: >> On Wednesday 06 May 2009 07:47:10 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>> Dirk Meyer and I think that we no longer need XEP-0246 (End-to-End XML >>> Streams) and XEP-0247 (Jingle XML Streams). Are there any objections to >>> simply retracting these? >> >> Wasn't there a plan to have Link-Local Messaging depend on XEP-246? > > I think that was just us getting spec-happy. I would be a nice idea if we would have gone with XEP-0247 so it can share spec with link-local. But link-local is now the only one using this kind of stream and also in draft state. Dirk -- I have yet to meet a C compiler that is more friendly and easier to use than eating soup with a knife.
Re: [Standards] XEPs 246 + 247 (end-to-end streams)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/6/09 9:32 AM, Justin Karneges wrote: > On Wednesday 06 May 2009 07:47:10 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> Dirk Meyer and I think that we no longer need XEP-0246 (End-to-End XML >> Streams) and XEP-0247 (Jingle XML Streams). Are there any objections to >> simply retracting these? > > Wasn't there a plan to have Link-Local Messaging depend on XEP-246? I think that was just us getting spec-happy. Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkoBu2sACgkQNL8k5A2w/vwDKwCgn1C/PV2RK5LfAkZY6mSCZFUr d4UAn2ujgJtQI1P0cP3VqAx3ULVEPMx+ =ceRu -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Standards] XEPs 246 + 247 (end-to-end streams)
On Wednesday 06 May 2009 07:47:10 Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > Dirk Meyer and I think that we no longer need XEP-0246 (End-to-End XML > Streams) and XEP-0247 (Jingle XML Streams). Are there any objections to > simply retracting these? Wasn't there a plan to have Link-Local Messaging depend on XEP-246? -Justin
Re: [Standards] XEPs 246 + 247 (end-to-end streams)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 5/6/09 9:15 AM, Marcus Lundblad wrote: > ons 2009-05-06 klockan 08:47 -0600 skrev Peter Saint-Andre: > Dirk Meyer and I think that we no longer need XEP-0246 (End-to-End XML > Streams) and XEP-0247 (Jingle XML Streams). Are there any objections to > simply retracting these? > >> Is there a preferred way to setup e2e security, rather than using Jingle >> sessions? >> Will the XTLS proposal be worked on instead? The most up-to-date thinking is here: http://xmpp.org/internet-drafts/draft-meyer-xmpp-e2e-encryption-01.html Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkoBqqoACgkQNL8k5A2w/vyMtACgjIhHXThP4gpn9nt3IGWcN6Pk OQIAniUp42n+r93DGLAj8SWnFZ4U5rxL =6i5J -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [Standards] XEPs 246 + 247 (end-to-end streams)
ons 2009-05-06 klockan 08:47 -0600 skrev Peter Saint-Andre: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Dirk Meyer and I think that we no longer need XEP-0246 (End-to-End XML > Streams) and XEP-0247 (Jingle XML Streams). Are there any objections to > simply retracting these? Is there a preferred way to setup e2e security, rather than using Jingle sessions? Will the XTLS proposal be worked on instead? //Marcus > Peter > > - -- > Peter Saint-Andre > https://stpeter.im/ > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org > > iEYEARECAAYFAkoBou4ACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzvbACg1gLJ/JRGaKlKlrTxaGCkti6K > /C4An2YRZT5qe1ri0IimQYw9uC/Ka2mB > =o4ea > -END PGP SIGNATURE- >
[Standards] XEPs 246 + 247 (end-to-end streams)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dirk Meyer and I think that we no longer need XEP-0246 (End-to-End XML Streams) and XEP-0247 (Jingle XML Streams). Are there any objections to simply retracting these? Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkoBou4ACgkQNL8k5A2w/vzvbACg1gLJ/JRGaKlKlrTxaGCkti6K /C4An2YRZT5qe1ri0IimQYw9uC/Ka2mB =o4ea -END PGP SIGNATURE-
