On 2016-06-13 21:06, Magnus Henoch wrote:
> I haven't been able to use the Facebook XMPP interface for a while. It
> still listens on port 5222 on chat.facebook.com, and STARTTLS
> negotiation succeeds, and then it offers two SASL mechanisms,
> X-FACEBOOK-PLATFORM and PLAIN.
It's dead. I don't
Hi all,
I haven't been able to use the Facebook XMPP interface for a
while. It still listens on port 5222 on chat.facebook.com, and
STARTTLS negotiation succeeds, and then it offers two SASL
mechanisms, X-FACEBOOK-PLATFORM and PLAIN. My client only
implements PLAIN, so that's what it
On 05/15/2008 9:18 AM, Norman Rasmussen wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What about a list of social networks which we predict (or know for
sure) will adopt XMPP in the future? That may prevent some useless
work in the future and it gives
Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing:
simple
sametime
ocs
And hell:
xmpp
Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I
don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =)
Daniel
On 5/22/08 1:20 PM, Peter Saint-Andre
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Let me know when you'd like me to add MySpaceIM to the gateway list:
FYI: iq from=myspace.dev.localhost id=ac12a type=result
query xmlns=http://jabber.org/protocol/disco#info;
identity category=gateway type=myspace
Daniel Henninger wrote:
Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing:
simple
sametime
ocs
And hell:
xmpp
Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I
don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =)
Then make it
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing:
simple
sametime
ocs
And hell:
xmpp
Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I
don't really think that ought to be officially registered.
Because some people want it. You've always complained about it. I've always
have people request it. At the end of the day, if people want it, I'd rather
help them out than argue with you about it.
Daniel
On 5/22/08 2:03 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/5/22 Daniel
On 05/22/2008 11:50 AM, Norman Rasmussen wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 6:20 PM, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Let me know when you'd like me to add MySpaceIM to the gateway list:
identity category=gateway type=myspace name=MySpaceIM Transport /
Duly noted. :)
/psa
2008/5/22 Maciek Niedzielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sander Devrieze wrote:
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
xmpp
Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I
don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =)
Yes, why do you
On 05/22/2008 11:40 AM, Daniel Henninger wrote:
Any reason not to go ahead and add it? I also wouldn't mind seeing:
simple
sametime
ocs
Perhaps lcs as well? I think that LCS and OCS use different flavors of
MS-SIMPLE. But I'll check on that
And hell:
xmpp
Ick. But, yes, I suppose so.
Sander Devrieze wrote:
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
xmpp
Since such a thing does exist. =) I'm actually also using gtalk, but I
don't really think that ought to be officially registered. *shrug* =)
Yes, why do you actually have such a transport? AFAICS this only can
I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums.
Daniel
On 5/22/08 2:25 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/5/22 Maciek Niedzielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sander Devrieze wrote:
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
xmpp
Since such a thing does
I'm responded to that question many times in the Ignite Realtime forums. To
date I've never had one confused end user. Either way, don't use it if you
don't like it.
Daniel
On 5/22/08 2:25 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/5/22 Maciek Niedzielski [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sander
Huh. Good job Entourage. Sent that one before I finished typing. Longer one
came afterwards.
Daniel
On 5/22/08 2:27 PM, Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums.
Daniel
On 5/22/08 2:25 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums.
Do you have links? Remember this is a thread that is intended to post URLs ;-)
--
Mvg, Sander Devrieze.
Laugh I don't have time to sit here and run through the forums looking for
links.
Daniel
On 5/22/08 2:40 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I've answered this question many times in the openfire support forums.
Do you have links?
2008/5/22 Daniel Henninger [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I'm responded to that question many times in the Ignite Realtime forums. To
date I've never had one confused end user. Either way, don't use it if you
don't like it.
It makes people think Google Talk is no XMPP. That's what I mean with confusion.
list
Subject: Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
2008/5/16 Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 05/15/2008 4:33 PM, Sander Devrieze wrote:
2008/5/15 JabberForum [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I aggree. I don't really see a point in having an open letter. They
know
of our existence, and they'll contact us
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:28 PM, Nick Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So how about writting an open letter to these
influential companies? Who thinks this is a good idea?
I agree. It won't hurt, besides it will help us gain visibility,
which we cruelly lack nowadays, especially when big
Yes, but please, PLEASE, never ever forget anymore those BIG players:
* Gadu-Gadu in Poland
* Nate On in South Korea
* QQ in China
* soon Baidu Hi in China
All of them are deeply anchored in their area of adoption,
even if you don't see them from your part of the world.
Remember also that
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:39 AM, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An open letter
I don't believe in open letters. How gauche!
[...]
we [...] decided that we would stop doing press releases
because they are *so* 20th-century. Now we just blog:
http://blog.xmpp.org/
Most
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
First contact several potential walled garden owners and get
them to support the open letter by switching to XMPP.
Here's a thought that might cause some discussion: Even if the
'walled-gardens' _only_ implement s2s,
2008/5/16 Norman Rasmussen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
First contact several potential walled garden owners and get
them to support the open letter by switching to XMPP.
Here's a thought that might cause some discussion:
Remko Tronçon a écrit :
And a diggable story of mine: http://coccinella.im/never-support-walled-gardens
Laughing at people and pointing fingers is always easy (especially
afterwards), but it doesn't help anybody. Why not post or do something
constructing instead.
I'm not sure there is much
To come back at Sander's point, I don't think we can blame client's
developers indeed but rather we should wonder why Facebook has dropped
their own technology like that?
I highly doubt they are dropping their technology, the web based chat
will im sure stay, just like google has the web
I highly doubt they are dropping their technology, the web based chat
will im sure stay, just like google has the web based gtalk inside of
gmail, they are just adding an XMPP interface to their chat app.
If they do, I wonder how sustainable that would be. That would seem like a
costly
I wasn't so afraid about the scaling as much as the duplication of intent.
Granted I've never used their chat feature (I haven't used Facebook in
ages really) but if it does what it says on the box why would you have two
distinct protocols to perform the same job? It seems costly in the sense
Lets just wait and see what happens.
I think that's the best option indeed and I'll stop my paranoia for now ;)
I personally thanked and congratulated them by e-mail,
underlining they did a good choice.
I also asked for an opening of their S2S,
and proposed my help..
Though they were
Lets just wait and see what happens.
I think that's the best option indeed and I'll stop my paranoia for now ;)
- Sylvain
--
Sylvain Hellegouarch
http://www.defuze.org
Lets just wait and see what happens.
I think that's the best option indeed and I'll stop my paranoia for now
;)
I personally thanked and congratulated them by e-mail,
underlining they did a good choice.
I also asked for an opening of their S2S,
and proposed my help..
Though they were
I highly doubt they are dropping their technology, the web based chat
will im sure stay, just like google has the web based gtalk inside of
gmail, they are just adding an XMPP interface to their chat app.
If they do, I wonder how sustainable that would be. That would seem like
a
costly
On Thu May 15 09:32:12 2008, Richard Dobson wrote:
That's what I'm afraid of as well. Probably that they will also
create
their own extensions like Google does. That's always a risk with
companies
that claim using open standards... well to a certain extent.
Just have to see what happens,
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
btw: very funny that very recently both Digsby and Adium people wasted
their time with implementing Facebook support...their code can soon be
directed to the waste bin...never take the risk to add support for
walled
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 3:28 PM, Nick Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
---8--- cut
Wether or not you're against or with the walled gardens,
we have to help them implement a real XMPP service,
respecting the XEP, and
Wether or not you're against or with the walled gardens,
It doesn't even matter whether or not you're for or against walled
gardens. Being against people who *interface* these walled gardens
into open source / open protocols, *that's* a very strange attitude.
That's what Nick tried to say, and
2008/5/15 Nick Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 12:24 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
btw: very funny that very recently both Digsby and Adium people wasted
their time with implementing Facebook support...their code can soon be
directed to the waste bin...never
Dnia 2008-05-15, czw o godzinie 10:21 +0200, Sylvain Hellegouarch pisze:
That's what I'm afraid of as well. Probably that they will also create
their own extensions like Google does. That's always a risk with
companies
that claim using open standards... well to a certain extent.
And this is a
2008/5/15 Nick Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Nicolas Vérité [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
we have to help them implement a real XMPP service,
respecting the XEP, and playing fair with XSF,
pushing/helping them contributing to the XEP processes,
and interop tests, and
Sanders: you do support users who use AIM and MSN, since you *waste your
time* making sure coccinella works with transports. And you do support users
of Microsoft Windows, since you *wast your time* making sure coccinella
works in Windows. And this is a good thing! Thank you! :)
2008/5/15 Nick Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sanders: you do support users who use AIM and MSN, since you *waste your
time* making sure coccinella works with transports. And you do support users
of Microsoft Windows, since you *wast your time* making sure coccinella
works in Windows. And this is a
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Nicolas Vérité [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
we have to help them implement a real XMPP service,
respecting the XEP, and playing fair with XSF,
pushing/helping them contributing to the XEP processes,
and interop tests, and more...
I agree. We should draft an
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 4:39 PM, Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What about a list of social networks which we predict (or know for
sure) will adopt XMPP in the future? That may prevent some useless
work in the future and it gives people a nice indication that XMPP is
the future (I
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Sander Devrieze
Sent: 15 May 2008 04:47 PM
To: Jabber/XMPP software development list
Subject: Re: [jdev] Facebook XMPP
2008/5/15 Nick Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Sanders: you do support users who use
On 05/15/2008 8:39 AM, Sander Devrieze wrote:
2008/5/15 Nick Vidal [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Nicolas Vérité [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
we have to help them implement a real XMPP service,
respecting the XEP, and playing fair with XSF,
pushing/helping them contributing
Dnia 2008-05-15, czw o godzinie 10:21 +0200, Sylvain Hellegouarch pisze:
That's what I'm afraid of as well. Probably that they will also create
their own extensions like Google does. That's always a risk with
companies
that claim using open standards... well to a certain extent.
And this
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(I miss the Jabber Journals...).
Yes those were nice. Too bad I don't have time to write them anymore.
Do you need help?
Nÿco
--
Nicolas Vérité (Nÿco) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jabber ID : xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 05/15/2008 9:58 AM, Nicolas Vérité wrote:
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:40 PM, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(I miss the Jabber Journals...).
Yes those were nice. Too bad I don't have time to write them anymore.
Do you need help?
Always. :)
Nowadays, rather than waiting 6
Hi Folks,
(Lurker materializes)
One comment I would like to make about this discussion of whether or not
to work on multiprotocol clients/i.e. whytransportsmatter.
It's not realistic IMHO to expect that the whole world will transfer to
open protocols/XMPP overnight...as much as some of us
How can Facebook (and others) win by adopting XMPP to its full potential?
If we can answer this question and write an open letter to Facebook, Google,
Yahoo, Microsoft, Twitter, etc, successfully making them realize that this
is the way to go, inviting them to have access to these valuable
Hi Nick,
Although I don't think an open letter would do much harm, I'm not sure
it would do much good, frankly. Although I agree with you that lock-in
strategies are diminishing in their importance in software given the
net, in my experience it is *very* hard to convince commercial
I aggree. I don't really see a point in having an open letter. They know
of our existence, and they'll contact us soon enough.
--
florian
'Flosoft.biz' (http://www.flosoft.biz)
florian's Profile:
This is hot news!!! Thanks for the Fyi!
Sean
On 5/14/08, Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
/psa
2008/5/15 JabberForum [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I aggree. I don't really see a point in having an open letter. They know
of our existence, and they'll contact us soon enough.
An open letter maybe can be useful if it is done as some kind of press
release. First contact several potential walled garden
On 05/15/2008 4:33 PM, Sander Devrieze wrote:
2008/5/15 JabberForum [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I aggree. I don't really see a point in having an open letter. They know
of our existence, and they'll contact us soon enough.
An open letter
I don't believe in open letters. How gauche!
maybe can be
2008/5/16 Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 05/15/2008 4:33 PM, Sander Devrieze wrote:
2008/5/15 JabberForum [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I aggree. I don't really see a point in having an open letter. They know
of our existence, and they'll contact us soon enough.
An open letter
I don't
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
/psa
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On 05/14/2008 7:13 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
More here:
http://developers.facebook.com/news.php?blog=1story=110
/psa
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On 14-May-08, at 9:13 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
And from the horse's mouth :
http://developers.facebook.com/news.php?blog=1story=110
w00t!
--
James Walker ::
On 14-May-08, at 9:41 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 05/14/2008 7:13 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
More here:
http://developers.facebook.com/news.php?blog=1story=110
hah, whoops.
That's enormously awesome news :)
~ Anders
On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 6:42 AM, James Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 14-May-08, at 9:41 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
On 05/14/2008 7:13 AM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
As seen on the InterWebs:
2008/5/14 Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
And another one with much comments:
http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/05/13/facebook-working-on-jabberxmpp-support-for-chat/
btw: very funny
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
/psa
Some thoughts on that topic:
http://www.defuze.org/archives/17-Facebook-goes-XMPP.html
- Sylvain
2008/5/14 Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/5/14 Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
And another one with much comments:
2008/5/14 Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/5/14 Sander Devrieze [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
2008/5/14 Peter Saint-Andre [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As seen on the InterWebs:
http://www.allfacebook.com/2008/05/breaking-facebook-to-launch-jabberxmpp-support/
snip other links
And a diggable story of
And a diggable story of mine:
http://coccinella.im/never-support-walled-gardens
Laughing at people and pointing fingers is always easy (especially
afterwards), but it doesn't help anybody. Why not post or do something
constructing instead.
Just my 2 cents,
Remko
PS: it feels like the jabber
On 05/14/2008 8:52 PM, Remko Tronçon wrote:
And a diggable story of mine:
http://coccinella.im/never-support-walled-gardens
Laughing at people and pointing fingers is always easy (especially
afterwards), but it doesn't help anybody. Why not post or do something
constructing instead.
67 matches
Mail list logo
