[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0368 (SRV records for XMPP over TLS)

2017-02-16 Thread XMPP Extensions Editor
Version 0.1.2 of XEP-0368 (SRV records for XMPP over TLS) has been released. Abstract: This specification defines a procedure to look up xmpps-client/xmpps-server SRV records (for direct TLS connections) in addition to xmpp-client/xmpp-server and mix weights/priorities. Changelog: Implement

Re: [Standards] MIX (XEP-0369) post-summit update to 0.8

2017-02-16 Thread Jonas Wielicki
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hey Steve, I’m new to MIX and new in the XSF, so please bear with me if I’m raising things which have been discussed already. In that case it would be great to have rationale in the XEP. Steve, you also should have gotten a mail directly

Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0280 (Message Carbons)

2017-02-16 Thread Georg Lukas
* Matthew A. Miller [2017-02-16 18:31]: > About the only argument I'm aware of for keeping it is existing > implementations. If the namespace version bumps, that kind of > "solves" that problem. I really don't like bumping, but as this is a privacy-sensitive matter,

Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0280 (Message Carbons)

2017-02-16 Thread Matthew A. Miller
> On Feb 16, 2017, at 10:28, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: > > On 2/16/17 10:02 AM, Georg Lukas wrote: >> * Ruslan N. Marchenko [2017-02-13 19:30]: As there was no consensus two years ago, I just added both elements to 0280 in

Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0280 (Message Carbons)

2017-02-16 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
On 2/16/17 10:02 AM, Georg Lukas wrote: * Ruslan N. Marchenko [2017-02-13 19:30]: As there was no consensus two years ago, I just added both elements to 0280 in https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/382 Thanks for clarification, but then still, why two? if is still required to

Re: [Standards] MIX (XEP-0369) post-summit update to 0.8

2017-02-16 Thread Georg Lukas
Hi Steve, thanks again for keeping this running. I'm still confused about how MIX and MAM are going to interact in practice. While the concept is clear, I still wonder: - whether the participant's server, the MIX channel or both need to keep MAM archives of a channel (or only of individual

Re: [Standards] LAST CALL: XEP-0280 (Message Carbons)

2017-02-16 Thread Georg Lukas
* Ruslan N. Marchenko [2017-02-13 19:30]: > >As there was no consensus two years ago, I just added both elements to > >0280 in https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/382 > > Thanks for clarification, but then still, why two? if is still > required to avoid bump, why not to stick to

Re: [Standards] XEP-0280 Carbon Rules for MUC-PMs

2017-02-16 Thread Jonas Wielicki
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hey list, On Freitag, 27. Januar 2017 14:36:56 CET Georg Lukas wrote: > Suggestions > --- > > #1 Detect "messages sent by a MUC room or service" > > Current best practice is for MUC implementations to add a tag to all > messages

[Standards] UPDATED: XEP-0280 (Message Carbons)

2017-02-16 Thread XMPP Extensions Editor
Version 0.12.0 of XEP-0280 (Message Carbons) has been released. Abstract: In order to keep all IM clients for a user engaged in a conversation, outbound messages are carbon-copied to all interested resources. Changelog: [See revision history] (gl) Diff: