[jdev] Gtalk implements jep-0136; any implementations for the rest of us?

2006-02-07 Thread Matthew Wilson
It looks like gtalk implemented something like server-side logging specified in jep-0136. Is there an open-source implementation in the works for the rest of us?

[jdev] Re: Gtalk implements jep-0136; any implementations for the rest of us?

2006-02-07 Thread Remko Troncon
It looks like gtalk implemented something like server-side logging specified in jep-0136. Is there an open-source implementation in the works for the rest of us? Are you sure it is JEP-136 ? It looked to me like they just logged every message, because it works with any client. cheers, Remko

Re: [jdev] Re: Gtalk implements jep-0136; any implementations for the rest of us?

2006-02-07 Thread Matthew Wilson
On 2/7/06, Remko Troncon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are you sure it is JEP-136 ? It looked to me like they just logged every message, because it works with any client. Not sure at all; it just looks vaguely like 0136 since it's server-side, and it's possible for a client to disable the logging.

[jdev] Re: Re: Gtalk implements jep-0136; any implementations for the rest of us?

2006-02-07 Thread Remko Troncon
Not sure at all; it just looks vaguely like 0136 since it's server-side, and it's possible for a client to disable the logging. Well, it's not JEP-136 :-) All the client can do is enable/disable it, but the server does all the logging itself. This way, no matter what client you use to connect,

Re: [jdev] Re: Re: Gtalk implements jep-0136; any implementations for the rest of us?

2006-02-07 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Remko Troncon wrote: Not sure at all; it just looks vaguely like 0136 since it's server-side, and it's possible for a client to disable the logging. Well, it's not JEP-136 :-) All the client can do is enable/disable it, but the server does all

[jdev] LiPS

2006-02-07 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 It might be nice to have XMPP support in the Linux Phone Standards project, eh? :-) http://www.lipsforum.org/ Peter - -- Peter Saint-Andre Jabber Software Foundation http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.shtml -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version:

[jdev] MUC implementors poll

2006-02-07 Thread Peter Saint-Andre
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 In version 1.17 of JEP-0045 (2004-10-04), the FORM_TYPEs for room configuration and for user registration requests were modified. This change was introduced late in the standards process and may not have been advisable (that's the same day the XMPP

Re: [jdev] MUC implementors poll

2006-02-07 Thread Norman Rasmussen
Only having ever implemented room config for the irc client (and even the using a form that was missing the FORM_TYPE), I can't say much, but I think I'd prefer to stick with Option #1, i.e. keep the namesas #roomconfig, and #register. (This just makes more sense). To be honest any application

Re: [jdev] MUC implementors poll

2006-02-07 Thread Jacques Belissent
Norman Rasmussen wrote: Only having ever implemented room config for the irc client (and even the using a form that was missing the FORM_TYPE), I can't say much, but I think I'd prefer to stick with Option #1, i.e. keep the namesas #roomconfig, and #register. (This just makes more sense). To

Re: [jdev] looking for javascript programmer

2006-02-07 Thread zhaomin
I have more interesting this position but I only do at SOHO,Is it aviable? zhaomin - Original Message - From: Jack Moffitt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: jdev@jabber.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 1:23 AM Subject: Re: [jdev] looking for javascript programmer I'm looking to hire a

[jdev] Replay attacks?

2006-02-07 Thread Adam Hunt
I have an idea in my head that I've been playing with for some time now. It involves using Jabber as a communications method for in a control automation setting. One major security issue that I'm not sure about is replay attacks. Even if all the connections are encrypted using SSL it would seem

Re: [jdev] Replay attacks?

2006-02-07 Thread Justin Karneges
On Tuesday 07 February 2006 21:37, Adam Hunt wrote: level XMPP would be susceptible to replay attacks. Has any work been done on securing against such attacks? Session-based security (JEP-116) solves replay attacks. For simpler single message security, I have a replay prevention scheme in