Hi Schimon,

There are many people on this list, with their own interests. I would not discourage them from contributing in their own ways: even if you don't think this is an interesting problem, they might.

At to Atom Over XMPP, that was a somewhat experimental idea at the time and IIRC we didn't really push it forward. So I would not judge an entire organization (IETF) and the people involved in it today because of something that happened in 2008. Also, the IETF *did* publish all the core XMPP RFCs, and that has to count for something, no?

Peter

On 10/7/25 2:06 PM, Schimon Jehudah wrote:
While I do appreciate some of the publication of IETF, I do not think
that it deserves any attention, especially not our attention, of the
people of XMPP, for the IETF has rejected Atomsub (Atom Over XMPP).

I do sense, that we should further incorporate more PPN (Peer-to-peer
Network) means into XMPP, and let thise "HTTP people" to "play" with
their own "soup", for a lack of a better phrase.

Lest forget that in the past those organizations have formed the
"Peer-to-peer Working Group" (peer-to-peerwg.org) in order to gradually
suppress P2P, not to promote it.

Schimon

On Tue, 7 Oct 2025 13:42:31 -0600
Peter Saint-Andre <[email protected]> wrote:

No, the subject line of this message is not a joke. :-)

The IETF has formed a "TIPTOP" working group to study and adapt
Internet protocols for communication over interplanetary distances.
[1] If anyone here is interested in this topic, I encourage you read
their documents [2] and sign up for their email discussion list [3].

Thanks for your attention!

Peter

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/tiptop/about/
[2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/tiptop/documents/
[3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/deepspace/
_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

_______________________________________________
Standards mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to