On 06/13/2008 3:12 PM, Dirk Meyer wrote:
> Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> 1. We modify XEP-0174 so it just defines _presence._tcp as a discovery
>> mechanism, as a result of which you have an IP address and port that you
>> can use for a direct TCP connection that functions as a transport for an
>> e2e XML stream.
>>
>> 2. We split the e2e XML streams stuff out from XEP-0174 into a new
>> "e2e-streams" spec, which defines how you use whatever reliable
>> transport is close to hand (direct TCP connection, IBB, SOCKS5, ice-tcp,
>> etc.) as the transport for an e2e XML stream (this can be unencrypted as
>> all XEP-0174 implementations do now, or upgraded to encrypted using
>> STARTTLS, which is what we'd recommend -- but this way it is
>> backwards-compatible and enables code reuse).
> 
> It should get a note about clientCert requests.

Correct.

>> 3. The current XTLS spec morphs into a new "Jingle-xmpp" spec that
>> defines a Jingle application type for an XMPP session (as defined in
>> XEP-streams), where that application type can use IBB, SOCKS5, ice-tcp,
>> or any other reliable transport.
> 
> Sounds ok to me. Funny thing is that XTLS gets closer again to my
> first idea (except that I did not used jingle). If you need some help
> writing 2. or 3. give me a call. I will be away for the weekend but
> could help you out on sunday evening (which will be the whole sunday
> in your timezone).

I hope to finish the work today, but we'll see if I'm successful...

> P.S.: Too bad I implemented the current XTLS today for testing

Ouch. You are too fast. :(

If we can get this spec'd out soon, perhaps we'll even be able to hold a
bit of an interop event + hackfest at the XMPP Summit July 21 and 22:

http://www.xmpp.org/summit/summit5.shtml

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to