Dave Cridland wrote: > Okay, so the gain here is that we lose the Jingle negotiation, > effectively, and mandate something roughly equivalent to IBB.
Yes > The downside is that we lose the ability to go direct from client to > client should we need to, and one reason for doing so would be for > efficiency. (There are others, independent of encryption). Yes. The question is: what do we want? Jingle-based allows direct connections with the cost of many additional roundtrips: while XTLS only needs 3 roundtrips, Jingle XML streams need at least 7, maybe more depending on the transport. And it is the question of work for the developer: if you have Jingle and link-local support, Jingle XML streams is as simple as it can get. But if you don't have these, XTLS is much easier. Jingle XML Streams: More flexible. You can use direct connections and it would also be possible to use other features besides STARTTLS XTLS: Much faster, easier to implement I'm not sure what's better. > As I see it, there are two ways of approaching cryptography in XMPP: > > 1) We concentrate on getting an efficient, but basic, end-to-end > encryption protocol, which is easy to write and deploy. I'm firmly > convinced that the XEP-0247 approach is right here - it's allowing us > to get the transport right, the authentication right, and all using > existing crypto libraries as much as possible. I just don't see any > real likelyhood of clients not being able to use Jingle, given > XEP-0234 etc. In this scenario, the server isn't involved at all, and > the scope for cryptography is narrow. > > 2) We concentrate on getting a full-featured cryptography suite in > place, akin to S/MIME and ESS in email. In this scenario, the server > may well be involved, discarding bad packets, verifying signatures, > and we'd be aiming to support things like MUC and PubSub. This is not > going to be possible with TLS, we need to go to things like XML-dsig, > and involve triple-wrapping and other fun things. > > I don't see which this proposal is addressing. 1) It is the same as XEP-0247: we use TLS. XTLS and XEP-0247 only differ in the transport we use. Dirk -- This signature is temporarily under construction