On 19.09.2017 11:37, Dave Cridland wrote: > On 19 September 2017 at 09:21, Klaus Herberth <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Klaus, >> Hi Andrey, >> >>> What do you mean by "libsignal"? There are at least 4(+1) libraries: >> With libsignal I referred to your linked implementations of WhisperSystems. >> >>> Note, javascript favor is already available. >> I know, but it is GPL and this doesn't work for everyone. >> >>> BTW, why is it terrible? >> It's terrible, because the wire format of those implementations aren't >> documented (as far as I know) and therefore it's quite hard to implement >> such protocol by your own. I think a protocol should be like an Internet >> Standard defined in RFC1310: >> >> "In general, an Internet Standard is a specification that is stable >> and well-understood, is technically competent, has multiple, >> independent, and interoperable implementations with operational >> experience, enjoys significant public support, and is recognizably >> useful in some or all parts of the Internet." >> >> I think "multiple independent and interoperable implementations" are >> currently missing for the "signal protocol". If we would have some kind >> of documentation for the wire format and a clear hint in the XEP that >> libsignal is needed it would be a great help for everyone who wants to >> implement this XEP. >> > > I entirely and unreservedly agree with you. > > For what its worth, the XMPP Council originally rejected this XEP > because it was reliant on a single library; while we were assured that > this was not the case anymore, and anyone could easily (I believe the > word "trivially" was used multiple times) implement a fully > independent implementation and have it interoperate, you are sadly > proving that this is not the case.
You are only telling half of the story. The original authors of the XEP worked on a follow up version [1] which put the wire format into the XEP and was based (mostly) on the Signal specification, which is a open standard [2]. The existing OMEMO implementations could trivially upgrade to what is specified in [1], and new implementations, like the one Klaus tries to write, could reimplement everything from scratch (if they want), since the ultimate goal of [1] was it to have all parts openly and well specified. Or, of course, new implementations could reuse the existing Axolotl/Signal/OMEMO ecosystem of libraries. Sadly that change was torpedoed by a small group (including you). - Florian 1: https://github.com/xsf/xeps/pull/460 2: https://signal.org/docs/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Standards mailing list Info: https://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/standards Unsubscribe: [email protected] _______________________________________________
