About the "G" string issue I would not have much to comment.
But folks I have an idea.. I think we should have a slogan related to the
implementation of the TLS everywhere manifesto, as it is owned by Green Latern
corps, it will sounds something like:
"We're people behind the XMPP networks. We'
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:08:29AM -0600, Jesse Thompson wrote:
>* Your users can chat with all Google users both on Talk and
> Hangouts. (My assumption is that people on Google Hangouts can
> still chat with people who have not yet converted from Talk to
> Hangouts.)
That seems to be the cas
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 09:50:43AM +, Dave Cridland wrote:
> However, I stress - the point, to me, of the 4th January test is not to cut
> connections to Google, or send some Message, or anything else along those
> lines.
Oh, I completely agree.
> The point is to see what happens, accepting t
On 11/22/2013 3:13 AM, Philipp Hancke wrote:
Same here, we can't cut off paying customers.
How many of them are complaining that their counterparts are not
responding anymore (because they use hangouts which don't display or get
messages from federated contacts)?
These users aren't complainin
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Tim Schumacher
wrote:
> In the past"Björn Kempén " wrote on this very list,
> that he is one of the responsible for the federation stuff at Google
> XMPP, btw at the beginning of this year, the TLS-issue was already a topic:
>
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/op
Am 22.11.2013 10:23, schrieb Simon Tennant:
> Speaking as someone, also with many gmail contacts in his roster that I'd
> like to keep communicating
with, I have two questions:
>
> * Who can we reach out to at Google and nudge? Time it short to get
something ready. Even if it's just to add TLS
Dave Cridland wrote:
> [..]
>The point is to see what happens, accepting there will be some
>disruption,
>and accepting that we may have to re-examine what we think is
>achievable
>here.
Indeed, not unlike World IPv6 Day.
--
ralphm
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 7:26 PM, Matthew Wild wrote:
> With all the talk about the details of the manifesto, one thing we
> seem to mostly only mention in passing is federation with Google, and
> I'm curious to gauge the opinion of people on this list.
>
> We are going to affect a lot of users ac
On 22 Nov 2013, at 09:40, Ralph Meijer wrote:
> David Banes wrote:
>>
>> On 22 Nov 2013, at 09:23, Simon Tennant wrote:
>>>
>>> - @server-developers: is there any way to whitelist gmail.com and
>> all
>>> Google Apps Domains? - that way it's an operator decision if they
>> choose to
>>> w
David Banes wrote:
>
>On 22 Nov 2013, at 09:23, Simon Tennant wrote:
>>
>> - @server-developers: is there any way to whitelist gmail.com and
>all
>> Google Apps Domains? - that way it's an operator decision if they
>choose to
>> whitelist. What I mean is something like "If the SRV record p
On 22 Nov 2013, at 09:23, Simon Tennant wrote:
>
> - @server-developers: is there any way to whitelist gmail.com and all
> Google Apps Domains? - that way it's an operator decision if they choose to
> whitelist. What I mean is something like "If the SRV record points to
> xmpp-server.l.g
On 22 Nov 2013, at 09:13, Philipp Hancke wrote:
>> Same here, we can't cut off paying customers.
>
> How many of them are complaining that their counterparts are not responding
> anymore (because they use hangouts which don't display or get messages from
> federated contacts)?
>
I've not had
Speaking as someone, also with many gmail contacts in his roster that I'd
like to keep communicating with, I have two questions:
- Who can we reach out to at Google and nudge? Time it short to get
something ready. Even if it's just to add TLS termination for gmail.com.
- @server-deve
Same here, we can't cut off paying customers.
How many of them are complaining that their counterparts are not
responding anymore (because they use hangouts which don't display or get
messages from federated contacts)?
On 22 Nov 2013, at 08:37, Robert Norris wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 22, 2013, at 07:29 PM, Eric Koldeweij wrote:
>> On 21-Nov-13 21:20, Solomon Peachy wrote:
>>> I have mixed feelings about this, because I'm the only user on my
>>> server, and only two folks on my roster aren't google-hosted.
>>> Frankly
On Fri, Nov 22, 2013, at 07:29 PM, Eric Koldeweij wrote:
> On 21-Nov-13 21:20, Solomon Peachy wrote:
> > I have mixed feelings about this, because I'm the only user on my
> > server, and only two folks on my roster aren't google-hosted.
> > Frankly, without Google federation I might as well not bot
On 21-Nov-13 21:20, Solomon Peachy wrote:
I have mixed feelings about this, because I'm the only user on my
server, and only two folks on my roster aren't google-hosted. Frankly,
without Google federation I might as well not bother.
I second this. Many of my users have contacts within Google
17 matches
Mail list logo
