Re: [xmpp] Consensus Call on Adoption of POSH

[Tobias Markmann <[e-mail]>]

Hi (this time to the whole list),

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 11:07 PM, Ben Campbell <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The XMPP working group has a chartered work item for enabling multi-domain
> hosting and server connection sharing.
>
> Matt has been working on POSH for a while now, as an enabler for that
> work. POSH is not currently expected to get its own working group, and no
> other working group is chartered for that work. Several people have
> proposed that, while POSH may have general applicability, XMPP is the group
> that needs it, and therefore XMPP should adopt it. It is further proposed
> that, we would try to keep it reasonably general, but would focus on XMPP
> related requirements.
>
> Should we adopt https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-miller-posh/ as a
> working group item in support of the aforementioned chartered work? Keep in
> mind that acceptance does not mean the work group thinks the draft is
> absolutely correct or complete. It merely means that we think that the
> draft is a good start towards the milestone.
>
> Please send your opinions to the XMPP working group by Jan 20.
>
> Thanks!
>

Yes. I think we should adopt POSH. The XMPP community as a whole is on its
way to ubiquitous encryption and authentication would be the obvious next
step from here [1]. POSH plays an important role here, especially for
hosted IM solutions, to bridge the time till DNSSEC and DANE is more
widespread, a lot TLDs still don't support DNSSEC, including the in the IM
world pretty popular .im TLD. I for one plan to update my current POSH
implementation for the Prosody XMPP server, which I started at the POSH BOF
meeting in Berlin.

Cheers,
Tobias

[1] https://github.com/stpeter/manifesto/blob/master/manifesto.txt