Dave Cridland wrote: > On Fri Aug 17 22:48:00 2007, Peter Saint-Andre wrote: >> Ian and I have talked about potentially submitting XEP-0124 (and perhaps >> XEP-0206) for standardization at the IETF. But it remains to be seen >> whether we'll do that anytime soon. However, BOSH is not really specific >> to XMPP now so it might make sense. > > It's been mentioned in a few places, including Lemonade. If Ian wants to > transform it into an RFC, I'd love to help.
Given my IETF experience, I'd probably do the editorial work on this. You know how I love to write I-Ds and shepherd them forward to RFC. :) > FWIW, the IETF isn't "good" at standardizing things like this, because > the IETF, in general, would prefer you to have "proper" TCP/IP > connectivity Wouldn't we all. To the universal deployment of IPv6! > - so BOSH becomes, hopefully, a waste of time. I suspect > this would end up with an IESG Note attached saying it's the best way to > handle a bad situation, but I'd hope we could get it onto the Standards > Track. OK, I will explore that some more with Ian. It sounds like fun... Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
