Re: The ecosystem is moving

Dave Cridland <> Sat, 14 May 2016 23:43 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C82112B025 for <>; Sat, 14 May 2016 16:43:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pHfpq4jMO2sa for <>; Sat, 14 May 2016 16:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E618212B01F for <>; Sat, 14 May 2016 16:43:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id v145so221417656oie.0 for <>; Sat, 14 May 2016 16:43:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=u7u6SiEEqpT4sO8XzPmyOhWvf7GLBrkAHNp5s4oOWEE=; b=H05yI5L09rwuUpNrbj99GhqTa/0xl7Xzx5v3uQ9ZvH+NTeW828WKFADHS2/QQV9XFa 0hj42o5TPGHah78TTSNrrkCxsV0te19HMcRq6gp6CJqi3b5r4Jy5e7RJYhGqtNnbFvhN tcerHY4O195NoQu7Nw49FRSR6nbLsb8RMBXlQ=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=u7u6SiEEqpT4sO8XzPmyOhWvf7GLBrkAHNp5s4oOWEE=; b=mW33AcvoPO5hk1UT0/cnt7j0QQbrD9DHF2zemOXHeZR8nMGHUwHYZjj8mGoUjvDZiS kU+n0mjtyA2kq09iRjMPfY0X7rsndAcS8RzSEdTkVyuembffmfi14Ror66ypZi1MfH24 BFvqEhbtNkS/bKXNByh7pbEW+7avRglSbIxJMx113C9S4kOGNTByWNCpHYfwDd3hJ+36 P2r7LGcCK4Qc5WlBSx2I0RTyfhrnGof1aTOKK1uXVQ+6TyIzwfijgizq6pYTLb/uuZVH 5J6KgI6uA6247k6PHIvxUJJwm8ZKNxqvArnltC3F6aQfiJx4nKKbp2mCx7b36Ahqu7+T 0qxw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FXc+wVWUyOQY7dN4F5lkoERFinOZxP/h0TFiO4o4jigqlXtUOf9TiBD7PTM7nWvnnNOAJFDgIQ/Bty8xucr
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id e125mr11088233oif.12.1463269420144; Sat, 14 May 2016 16:43:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Sat, 14 May 2016 16:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Sat, 14 May 2016 16:43:39 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Sun, 15 May 2016 00:43:39 +0100
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: The ecosystem is moving
From: Dave Cridland <>
To: Ned Freed <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ce0d2ffaef00532d5f5af
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>, Paul Wouters <>, Dave Crocker <>, " Discussion" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 May 2016 23:43:43 -0000

On 14 May 2016 18:24, "Ned Freed" <> wrote:
> > XMPP does not have ongoing problems with interop. Quite the opposite -
> > community is extremely positively engaged with the standards process at
> > XSF, and interoperability issues are detected fast, treated seriously,
> > fixed quickly. If they occur due to specifications being unclear, the
> > is fixed.
> > Every server I'm aware of, with the exception of Google's XMPP S2S
> > (still operating but fundamentally broken) has supported at least the
> > baseline of "XMPP" for years.
> Dave, all due respect, but this doesn't match my IETF experience, which
> up with Martin's and Ted's pretty closely. Every time a meeting rolls
around I
> have to fight to get jabber chat working.
> The BA meeting was better than usual. I fired up Psi, which despite being
> crappy I am forced to use for work because Adium won't talk to the
> jabber server for some reason. Finding the two accounts I had set up
> were both dead, I started the hunt for a functioning public server. (I
tried a
> private server once, but never succeeded in getting it going.)

I'm intrigued as to what you're using as your corporate server, and what
prevents you using that to join IETF chatrooms.

> After trying various server names from a list that obviously hadn't been
> updated in years, I found one that responded but wouldn't configure
properly in
> Psi. So I switched to Adium, where it worked.

Again, please let me know off list which server this is. The only thing I
can think of is if Psi is failing to use TLS, or cannot speak the available
sasl mechanisms. Possible, since XMPP had to move off digest md5 when that
became historic, and switched to scram, but maybe psi has been left behind
there. Possible that your corporate server has the same problems in
reverse, in which case it's probably also got major security holes running

This probably does count as an interop issue in a sense, but I think is a
necessary one.

> But the real test is whether or not you can join one of the IETF group
chats. I
> tried, and it worked. (My past experience has been that this has about a
> shot of working, and when it doesn't work there's absolutely no
indication of
> what's wrong.)

The IETF server, as I've mentioned, ran a self signed certificate for
years, after many services stopped peering with anything without a CA
signed certificate. It's fixed now, so should be considerably more reliable.

> So after maybe an hour of fiddling I once again had a working setup,
albeit one
> where I have to have use two different clients to connect to different
> As these things go, this counts as s significant success.
> Now, I have no doubt that I'm missing some sooper seecret sauce, have bad
> google-fu, should not be using a Mac because reasons, or whatever. But
> beside the point. As abjectly incompetent as I undoubtedly am with
jabber, I
> doubt very very much that I rise to the level of incompetence of the
> user setting up IM for the first time.

Fair comment. On a Mac, you might try, too.

> And perhaps all these problems are not "interoperability issues", by your
> definition of that term. But the bottom line is that the reasons why
> is a PITA don't change the fact that it's a PITA.

Oh, I don't dispute that is a pain to find a server. Google doesn't help
here, since their server is at best crippled, and at worst breaks things
entirely. But XMPP does work for millions of people who use it, federated,
on a routine basis.

>                                 Ned