On 29/07/2006, at 00:20 AM, Tony Yat-Tung Cheung wrote:
Hi,
I read that Google Talk is rolling out file transfer.
Does anyone which file transfer standard are they using?
The following link may be of interest.
http://wiki.jabber.org/index.php/Psi_JFT
TX
On Wednesday 19 July 2006 18:46, Benjamin Podszun wrote:
Please - don't mix banners with braindead and completely useless eMail
signatures.. These disclaimers you are probably talking about are
largely deemed irrelevant and I've yet to find one that really contains
anything worth the
On Monday 19 June 2006 17:08, Igor Goryachev wrote:
Hello.
I have several domains and want to implement something similar to
mail-like aliases (not virtual hosts) in jabber? Is it possible at
all?
It would be quite possible to implement, but I'm not familiar with a server
which offers this
On Monday 19 June 2006 21:37, Tony Finch wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006, Igor Goryachev wrote:
I have several domains and want to implement something similar to
mail-like aliases (not virtual hosts) in jabber? Is it possible at
all?
Forwarding is difficult in Jabber because it is closed-loop
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 22:56, Jesus Cea wrote:
Marco Balmer wrote:
I've implemented a beta of sms2jabber [1]. Try it and let me know.
Nice. But it refuses presence subscriptions :p
Not that this would stop one sending messages to it.
TX
--
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Will I have to let my users enter the address of the search server, or is
there some automatic way?
If you do a disco#items query against the main server's JID, it should (if
it's being friendly) list the search component's JID as a child. If
you're searching for users, you just need to find a
the JID without them having to sacrifice their password. Trejkaz, can you explain more about that approach? I have found this article which is about x google token. Is that what you mean?? http://dystopics.dump.be/2006/02/04/the-mysteries-of-x-google-token-and-why-it-matters/Google's is certainly one way
On Monday 05 June 2006 03:56, Michal vorner Vaner wrote:
On Mon, Jun 05, 2006 at 12:27:18AM +0700, Nguyen TV wrote:
- In case the JID belongs to [11]jabber.org, my server now will act
like a forward server. It receives messages from myClient then sends to
[12]jabber.org on behalf of
On Thursday 25 May 2006 05:19, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
BTW, this is interesting:
http://wiki.noreply.org/noreply/TheOnionRouter/TorifyHOWTO
See the listings under Instant Messaging...
Incidentally, I use this myself. TOR is my last resort in situations when I
can't SSH into anywhere to
On Tuesday 23 May 2006 11:38, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Anyone have any suggestions? Has anyone wrapped the Gaim libraries, by
chance? I'm not finding anything on Google, so I'm not optimistic.
There's no need for a Google transport, the Google Talk service uses
native XMPP
On Wednesday 24 May 2006 06:20, Remko Troncon wrote:
For what it's worth, I've been interested in a Jabber Transport of
sorts as well. I have a bazillion Jabber accounts at this point and
I'd kinda like to be able to log into a single location to get to all
of them. ;D (mainly because
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 19/05/2006, at 10:42 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, every apps pretty much do that using DOM and SAX?
but DOM is the in-memory representation, not what gets sent on
the wire? When you route, you have wait for the message to arrive..
because
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18/05/2006, at 03:23 AM, Jimmy Zhang wrote:
VTD-XML project team is proud to announce the availability
of both C, C# and Java version 1.5 of VTD-XML, the next generation
open-source XML parser that goes beyond DOM and SAX in
terms of
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 18/05/2006, at 13:02 PM, Jimmy Zhang wrote:
Not a problem, the document stay in memory for as long as the
application needs it...
afterwards it is garbage collected...
That's not the problem, the problem is that you can't have a whole
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 15/05/2006, at 11:58 AM, Tobias Thierer wrote:
Is the following a legal XMPP packet (linebreaks inserted for
readability)?
iq id=rpc-0wLET-8 to=[EMAIL PROTECTED]/Biomatters
type=set
query xmlns=jabber:iq:biomatters:rpc version=1.0
On Thursday 04 May 2006 15:58, Chris Mullins wrote:
The main use case which it seems to be addressing is, a user wants to
send an IM to the server admin, which is great - but this isn't a
strong way to do that. None of the users I know, including myself, would
send a message to jabber.org in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/05/2006, at 08:46 AM, Matthias Wimmer wrote:
Personally I'd like to implement SyncML on the server which could
be used to syncronize all types of data, not just the roster data
we are talking about here.
SyncML is an XML based
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/05/2006, at 08:15 AM, Matthias Wimmer wrote:
Hi Peter!
Peter Saint-Andre schrieb:
That was my experience as well. But that behavior is an artifact
of the
way jabberd 1.x sends out welcome messages.
What would be the suggested way to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/05/2006, at 14:19 PM, Chris Mullins wrote:
I went looking for a JEP that describes this, or anything with more
detail, but didn't see anything. There are some questions that I've
got:
You were probably looking for JEP-0157:
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 01:17, Michal vorner Vaner wrote:
it obeys one of the unix rules - one task = one program.
Any instant messaging application which implements voice or video chat already
disobeys this rule, so I don't think people should stick too strongly to it.
I do not thing the
On Tuesday 25 April 2006 04:47, Michal vorner Vaner wrote:
Anyway, GPG was designed to run under UNIX systems, where launching a
binary is really fast (it has to be, since many good application use
external programs for different actions, which menas configurability and
not duplexing of code)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 22/04/2006, at 01:51 AM, Maciek Niedzielski wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Justin Karneges wrote:
On Friday 21 April 2006 06:44, George Hazan wrote:
Does anybody know about an attempt to compile the GNUPG sources
as
Remko Troncon wrote:
- If you really want to support Google Talk, you can get away with a
regexp match on the JID, and enable all these non-standard extensions.
No other server is using these anyway. As long as GT doesn't change the
allowable email addresses, you're safe.
I wonder how long
On Wednesday 05 April 2006 18:24, Robert McQueen wrote:
In my client, I don't want to present a server-side Block List to the
user unless I know that I can actually block. If I've disco'd and found
iq:privacy, and implement it, I can offer this, but I'm not sure what to
do on Google.
Well,
On Thursday 06 April 2006 02:11, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Remko Troncon wrote:
we should make simple iq-based protocol for blocking and going
invisible, as a server-side profile of privacy lists.
Yes, that's probably a good idea. Could be done with JEP-0050 I guess.
Would it be possible to
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
What is the point of hardcoding visible-to-from rule? AFAICS, that is no
different from the visible rule (since you send presence only to people
who have subscribed to you). But perhaps I'm missing something. :-)
This is true. I had only thrown that in as an example.
On Wednesday 29 March 2006 01:57, Norman Rasmussen wrote:
If you can _please_ track down this user and find out which software
they're using. Take the software out and shoot it :-P
Seriously though, this is probably an older client that hasn't been
updated to follow the specs when they were
On Monday 13 March 2006 00:13, Jesus Cea wrote:
I agree :).
I've thinking for ages about a central service registration for
services. That is, that services available via XMPP can self-register in
a well known service. And that service could provide search features
for mere humans to locate
On Tuesday 14 March 2006 02:49, Peter Millard wrote:
This is exactly how I would implement this as well.
1) Have an external component that uses iq:register protocol with
x-data for picking themes, etc. This component subscribes to the
user's presence during registration (just like a
On Tuesday 14 March 2006 07:54, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Trejkaz wrote:
Well... unless
you gave Google permission to view all the users via service discovery.
Then you could do some really interesting things.
Yeah, like directory harvesting for spam. :-)
Well, the day Google start doing
On Tuesday 14 March 2006 04:13, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Trejkaz wrote:
On Monday 13 March 2006 00:13, Jesus Cea wrote:
I agree :).
I've thinking for ages about a central service registration for
services. That is, that services available via XMPP can self-register in
a well known
Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Now, neither OpenPGP or S/MIME enable you to repudiate what you said,
and if people find that important then they would need to do
JEP-0116 (or something very much like it, such as Gaim's OTR plugin).
So in part the differences here come down to requirements and
On Sunday 05 March 2006 22:05, Juan Antonio Gómez Moriano wrote:
Finally and considering that i will use OpenPGP to handle the
encryption, should i use GnuPG? I have been looking at the BouncyCastle
cryptography extension (a set of librearies to perform cryptographic
functions), by using that
On Monday 06 March 2006 07:04, Norman Rasmussen wrote:
Agreed, gpg/pgp keys are 'supposed' to be inheriently strong, and
therefore no automatic retrieval/exchange should even/ever be done,
ever.
People are getting confused here.
There is *nothing* wrong with automatically retrieving the PGP
On Friday 03 March 2006 21:10, Justin Karneges wrote:
Hmm, there shouldn't be a need to introduce server names into TLS, which is
technically supposed to exist independently of TCP/IP.
IMO, a better way would be to use RFC 2817, which allows upgrading a
plaintext HTTP connection to TLS
On Friday 03 March 2006 23:10, Richard Dobson wrote:
Funnily enough, if we'd had naming in TLS from the start, there probably
wouldn't even *be* STARTTLS since everyone would be using the better
method. :-)
I doubt that since the main reason STARTTLS is there is so that you can
reuse the
Jesus Cea wrote:
In current TLS, client gives the host it is trying to connect, BEFORE
negociating crypto. So if you are using a modern webserver and a modern
browser, you can share the IP.
Now, that's awesome. However, I know for sure that the very latest
release of Apache can't do it,
On Thursday 02 March 2006 06:38, Hal Rottenberg wrote:
On 3/1/06, Hal Rottenberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, but even so the from header isn't called SMTP-ID, it's called
from.
+1 for the more human-friendly Jabber-ID
Almost forgot to note that from is also not in URI format.
It's in
On Thursday 02 March 2006 05:59, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Let's say you are DreamHost, which has offered jabber services for years
now. You want to offer secure connections. But you host 50,000+ domains.
Are you going to have a separate certificate for each of those domains?
Yes, because it's
On Thursday 02 March 2006 06:36, Norman Rasmussen wrote:
This can be problematic for virtual hosting. Consider the following
scenario:
- - shakespeare.lit runs an XMPP server.
- - shakespeare.lit hosts XMPP services for denmark.lit, montague.lit,
capulet.lit, etc.
There are two
Gary Burd wrote:
A couple of snips from the conversation:
For hosting providers it's usually an up-sell to your
customers to add security
because it's each domain owner's responsibility to
manage their own certificate.
Extra cost and responsiblity can impede XMPP adoption.
Look, if
On Friday 17 February 2006 07:51, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
FYI, I've started to define a Jabber-ID email header so that people
can automatically detect JIDs associated with senders (could be cool for
presence icons in email clients, message verification a la JEP-0070,
etc.). More here:
On Saturday 11 February 2006 20:40, Norman Rasmussen wrote:
On 2/11/06, Trejkaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Friday 10 February 2006 03:01, Michal Vaner (Vorner) wrote:
Hello,
I would like to know, will there be a way to save conversations that
are encrypted, for example by gpg
On Friday 10 February 2006 03:01, Michal Vaner (Vorner) wrote:
Hello,
I would like to know, will there be a way to save conversations that are
encrypted, for example by gpg? Will there be a way to explicitly change the
history?
If you mean storing them decrypted, then you probably want to do
On Sunday 05 February 2006 19:52, Michal Vaner (Vorner) wrote:
Dne neděle 05 únor 2006 08:49 Trejkaz napsal(a):
Hi all.
I've been looking at knocking together a simple privacy list management
webapp, which might eventually be of use for all those poor people whose
clients don't support
On Sunday 05 February 2006 21:52, Michal Vaner (Vorner) wrote:
So basically what you're saying is, the only way to find out is to try
and then get an error, because:
1) a server might be 100% XMPP compliant, and simply allow the privacy
list feature to be disabled, or;
Then the
On Sunday 05 February 2006 22:54, Alexey Nezhdanov wrote:
В сообщении от Воскресенье 05 Февраль 2006 14:09 Trejkaz написал(a):
On Sunday 05 February 2006 21:52, Michal Vaner (Vorner) wrote:
So basically what you're saying is, the only way to find out is to
try and then get an error
I
Hi all.
I've been looking at knocking together a simple privacy list management
webapp, which might eventually be of use for all those poor people whose
clients don't support it directly.
One of the things I just noticed is that ejabberd doesn't list
jabber:iq:privacy as a feature in service
On Monday 30 January 2006 21:10, Remko Troncon wrote:
I am sending the following message to a googletalk recipient over S2S:
Is the recipient on your contact list, and vice versa ?
Wouldn't that have been the wrong error code if that's the case? It wasn't a
bad request...
TX
--
Norman Rasmussen wrote:
Google are validating the incoming stanzas more than anyone else has
before. jabberd2 currently sends stanzas in the jabber:client
namespace.
I've chatted to Stephen, and opened a bug for jabberd2 here:
http://j2.openaether.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=159
Aha. That
Chris Mullins wrote:
[Server Error Checking]
Norman Rasmussen Wrote:
I would be doing exactly the same as the google croud are.
If the connection breaks the spec - drop it fast.
hah. That might work for Google, but not for anyone else.
AKA Be liberal in what you accept, and
Norman Rasmussen wrote:
On 1/18/06, Trejkaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is that another glitch? IQs are always supposed generate a response, so
I would figure if someone drops the response, they should send an error
on so that the initial requester at least knows that something went wrong.
well
On Saturday 31 December 2005 22:53, Abdeltif Nouqrat wrote:
Hi,
in order to sniff the exchanged packets from/to jive-wildfire and
filter
specific packets, I want to write a proxy between jabber client and
the
server.
First I want to know if that's possible. If yes, what are the
information
On Thursday 22 December 2005 21:08, Norman Rasmussen wrote:
They should just be xmpp enabling aim ([EMAIL PROTECTED] anyone?),
and then gtalk should just work on their s2s support.
Now, that would be awesome for a number of reasons. Firstly, nobody would
ever need an AIM transport, unless in
In relation to groups that a contact can belong to, what is the valid
group
name syntax; just characters, numbers, and spaces?
Since I had the feeling that questions about valid names have been asked
before, I've looked through the archive of this list and looked at the
xmpp.org site.
agreed, tcl/tk looks ugly. gtk is fairly ugly too. Only really Qt is
starting to look pretty. (under win32). Notice Java dropped their
horrid Swing toolkit in preference for native widgets (which makes
apps like Azeureus look practically native)
Actually, this is almost exactly the
Also, Java didn't drop Swing. IBM developed the SWT library which is
used by the Eclipse IDE and RCP framework. Sun is still very much behind
Swing. Swing's new GTK LookAndFeel is using native Gtk widgets and is
looking VERY nice.
Actually to be precise, it's not using native widgets.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Trejkaz wrote:
On Windows, though, Swing draws just like any real theme, and thus looks
better than SWT, which does not.
And does any of the libraries support ClearType on Windows? I hate using
Java applications, because the fonts look so bad
I wouldn't know, since about 4 years ago I haven't seen any Java
applications where the fonts look bad.
Do you have ClearType enabled?
Yup.
TX
Lightspeed is not enough for an interplanetary instant-messaging system.
Why are we all talking about this anyway? Are people running out of ideas
for April 1, 2006? :-)
Anyway, I suspect that instant messaging is the least of your problems
with coping with interplanetary distances. Imagine
, each user takes up on average about 100 bits per
second. I'm not sure how much you could really save by merely shortening the
tag names (keeping in mind that many of them are already as short as they
could get: q in particular.)
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wednesday 26 October 2005 19:35, Jacek Konieczny wrote:
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 07:58:58AM +1000, Trejkaz wrote:
On Wednesday 26 October 2005 06:03, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
Well, mandatory-to-implement means must-implement in software, but
that doesn't mean that any particular
for software implementation, not necessarily deployment.
Do you suppose that Google have actually implemented the DIGEST-MD5 mechanism,
and simply have the feature turned off on their deployment? :-)
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org
On Wed, 2005-10-19 at 19:31 +0200, Chems Amrani wrote:
Hello
I have to develop a client Jabber working on different OS. Could you
tell me which API is suitable for that ? Maybe an API Java. Which one is
the simplest to use ?
For the moment feature like gateway with msn or other are not
. :-)
...
What's really stalling my brain here is that a company has a corporate policy
which basically states that all confidential information MUST be sent outside
the company, whereas sending it through more secure channels is naughty.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Mon, 3 Oct 2005 19:47, John Talbot wrote:
I would guess that Google would be willing to open up to a network of
other jabber servers once the problem of spam is solved.
...or rather, once they've written the S2S support for their custom server.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza
a search through the man pages.
Perl syntax is:
use encoding utf-8;
But I was under the impression that it was utf-8 by default. But that might
just be the difference... mine worked as-is, but maybe your system needs the
line.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED
server has to be in UTF-8, so it then proceeds to
encode those characters as two bytes each.
So I guess what you were seeing come out the other end was the result of that
encoding it was adding.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org
You can copy/paste it to see that it does indeed produce wrong output
(at least on jabberd 1.4 Perl 5.8.4 which I use, though I doubt
there's something wrong with these versions)
For comparison, Jabberd 1.4.4 and Perl 5.8.6:
https://trypticon.org/files/all_greek_to_me.png
Are you sure your
Which Jabber client software are you using on your desktop?
Ah, yes. That was Psi (on Windows, if it wasn't evident.)
TX
Even if it's not the best place for asking, I wanted to ask if you
know an open source software dedicated to the LAN chat. Because even
if iChat, Trillian other can do it, LAN chat is a bit different from
IM. For example, it doesn't require a (server) account - it's
something important in
Sometimes I think it would have been neat if nodes were part of JIDs in
the first place... then each service could have been a node off the
server's own JID, and everything would be happy. Well, maybe.
For pubsub, JEP-0060 section 4 (Addressing), mentions how you can do
this by putting the
be simply to
not give out the same name for a user and a conference room in the first
place.
As for the multi-DNS thing... we solve that using a wildcard entry. But I
guess this is only really a problem for people without access to their DNS.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 11:36, Perry Lorier wrote:
What happens if I register _tcp.com ?
How, exactly, would one go about registering an invalid hostname?
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 22:18, Perry Lorier wrote:
Trejkaz wrote:
On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 11:36, Perry Lorier wrote:
What happens if I register _tcp.com ?
How, exactly, would one go about registering an invalid hostname?
a hostname != a domain name. _ is an invalid name for a host. _tcp.com
Hi All,
I have an application with I need to query jabber to
determine a user's current presence status. Is there
any way to do this. I would like to do this in Java.
Smack or JSO are probably the two _main_ options available. Smack
probably has enough functionality to write something like
. ;-)
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
pgpAFYb2afT4C.pgp
Description: PGP signature
to handle aim: . Any one can tell how this
can be done ?
That rather depends on the client being used.
(I just started using im: instead of xmpp: on my own site recently... of
course, I have no clients which use them, but one day, maybe someone
will. ;-))
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza
2) TLS and s2s
My users will not have certs for their domains, and even if they did,
I wouldn't want to be responsible for keeping their private keys
secret. TLS is not an option for my service.
Why not? You might think about obtaining cacert certs during
provisioning as a part of your
the XMPP stream so hard is not to store the
data on the server itself but to pass it to some entity via a file transfer
stream.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B
Quoting Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Zhong Li wrote:
Can client save large private data, says 10M bytes data on jabber.org using
JEP-0049?
No. If you try, rate-limiting (karma) will prevent you from doing so.
If you try again, we'll delete your account. :-) If you need to store
that
Quoting Travis Shirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Imagine the following scenario:
1) UserA sends question to UserB
2) UserB receives message and consults browser/editor/etc. to answer
question.
3) UserB sends answer to UserA
At no point during this exchange does UserB stop paying attention to
the chat,
On Mon, 5 Sep 2005 22:56, Hal Rottenberg wrote:
On 9/5/05, Trejkaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, it would be better to use message IDs than timestamps. Those demos
highlight the problem reasonably well: when you have multiple messages at
the same time and someone replies to one message
Quoting Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
If clients recognize the message IDs, they could also include an
In-Reply-To SHIM header as described in JEP-0131 and include the
message ID there.
Here's the problem though. Presumably the MUC service, operating as a
component, has to assign new
Quoting Alexey Nezhdanov [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
There is a feature I would really like to see in jabber, it's a clock
system to specify to which message you reply to. This system has been
used succesfully for years in tribune like
http://linuxfr.org/board/ (you need to register to post, but you can
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
pgp57FSy4tTQC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Quoting Heiner Wolf [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I see the XML Schema says element 'photo' minOccurs=0, does anyone
object to putting multiple photo-elements?
Did Peter omit maxOccurs intentionally?
The default value for maxOccurs is 1.
So yes, the schema objects to putting multiple photo elements,
suppose we need some kind of iq
type='cancel'/ where you pass the same ID of the query you want to cancel...
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C
, but in general it's good to be able to receive messages from new users.
Spam might, of course, come from people who managed to get on the contact
list. Also, as someone else pointed out, the request to get on the contact
list can itself be a spam.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL
then gets
blacklisted, and they have to wait a whole new week to register again.
If you do it with blacklists, the spam admin might just buy a new domain once
a day to get around it.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID
in 2,000 entry forms.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
pgp4pQ7ezN8J7.pgp
Description: PGP signature
rocket science,
though. Naturally it would be good for them to have these records to make
users' life easier, but having to connect to a different IP address is
something that most libraries have to implement anyway, and that goes for any
protocol. :-)
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza
records exist or not. If the user specifies both the
host and the port, you shouldn't need to hit DNS at all.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F
of course have a SOCKS server built-in, but implementing
SOCKS in a Jabber client is a much more daunting task.
The real solution, I guess, is convincing work to open outbound ports
5222-5223.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
pgpsybn7jTU0H.pgp
Description: PGP signature
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org/
Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
GPG Fingerprint: 9EEB 97D7 8F7B 7977 F39F A62C B8C7 BC8B 037E EA73
pgp6VBd5iHMTk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
jdev
Quoting Fabio Forno [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hope this is not their solution. A network of trust could work (actually
CAcert is a network of trust, if I got it) since no server admin would
be Aunt Tillie ;)
CAcert is a network of trust, but trust of identity. I might be 100% certain
that a spammer
Quoting Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
hehe, maybe it is now the chance for me to tell them about the stable s2s in
ejabberd. I guess they would love the clustering support (and
Publish-Subscribe maybe also)! :-D
Well, one has to assume that Google's server solution can already cluster
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 15:35, Vinod Panicker wrote:
Any thoughts on this anyone?
Try xmpp-wg perhaps? Most people here aren't interested in defining a
protocol version which doesn't exist.
TX
--
Email: Trejkaz Xaoza [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site: http://trypticon.org
Quoting Samuel Goto [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello,
I am writing a new jabber component, and I was wondering if anyone
would have a good start point for writing it ... I read the jabber
component protocol, so I acctually need help on coding ( like using
libraries, tutorials, documents, sockets,
1 - 100 of 227 matches
Mail list logo
