XMPP Extensions Editor wrote: > Please consider the following questions during this Last Call and send > your feedback to the [email protected] discussion list:
Ok, here are some comments > 1. Is this specification needed to fill gaps in the XMPP protocol > stack or to clarify an existing protocol? I guess we all agree it does. > 2. Does the specification solve the problem stated in the introduction and > requirements? Yes > 3. Do you plan to implement this specification in your code? If not, > why not? I started with the basics needed for e2e TLS > 4. Do you have any security concerns related to this specification? Security is part of the transport or the application based on Jingle. So no, looks fine by me. > 5. Is the specification accurate and clearly written? That may be a problem. When I first look at a XEP I read what problem it solves and take a quick look at the examples. Jingle is very complicated when looking at the examples, but the complicated stuff is part of the application using Jingle. Example 15: | <iq from='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/balcony' | id='accept1' | to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/orchard' | type='set'> | <jingle xmlns='urn:xmpp:jingle:0' | action='session-accept' | initiator='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/orchard' | responder='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/balcony' | sid='a73sjjvkla37jfea'> | <content creator='initiator' name='voice'> | <description xmlns='urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:rtp:0' media='audio'> | <payload-type id='97' name='speex' clockrate='8000'/> | <payload-type id='18' name='G729'/> | </description> | <transport xmlns='urn:xmpp:jingle:transports:ice-udp:0'> | <candidate component='1' | foundation='1' | generation='0' | ip='192.0.2.3' | network='1' | port='45664' | priority='1678246398' | protocol='udp' | pwd='asd88fgpdd777uzjYhagZg' | type='srflx' | ufrag='8hhy'/> | </transport> | </content> | </jingle> | </iq> Wow, that is a long stanza. But if we look at it closly, description is part of RTP over Jingle and transport is from ICE. So the real work Jingle does is | <iq from='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/balcony' | id='accept1' | to='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/orchard' | type='set'> | <jingle xmlns='urn:xmpp:jingle:0' | action='session-accept' | initiator='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/orchard' | responder='[EMAIL PROTECTED]/balcony' | sid='a73sjjvkla37jfea'> | <content creator='initiator' name='voice'> | <application specific code/> | <transport xmlns='urn:xmpp:jingle:transports:ice-udp:0'> | <transport specific code/> | </transport> | </content> | </jingle> | </iq> That example is easier to read, it is focused on what we need for Jingle: the attributes in <jingle>. I know we should use real-life examples, but maybe use some from file transfer over Jingle as a simpler example. Or maybe add color-codes (I know we do not do that ATM): make the application and transport specific stuff gray so anyone can find what XEP-0166 is doing. Dirk -- "Either toss the Windows out of your computer, or toss your computer out the window!" -- Richard Stallman
