On 06/04/2008 12:35 PM, Justin Karneges wrote: > On Wednesday 04 June 2008 9:43 am, Dirk Meyer wrote: >> Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >>> Well XTLS is not well-defined yet, but I will turn my attention to it >>> soon. The approach of starttls and then IBB was mentioned by Justin >>> Karneges here: >>> >>> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/security/2007-March/000018.html >>> >>> And that seems reasonable to me. >> My fault. I only took a quick look at xtls and assumed it uses DTLS >> (which is scary like Justin wrote). Now that I see that xtls always >> uses <iq> and is in fact "normal" tls wrapped in XML it looks good to >> me. > > XTLS as currently documented is not usable,
Right, that was a very early pass and never updated again. However I think it would be good to update it using the approach you've outlined, I just haven't found the time to do that. /psa
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
