Re: [xmpp] New(ish) draft: Secure Messaging in XMPP

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Thu, 05 November 2015 09:46 UTC

Return-Path: <dave@cridland.net>
X-Original-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E63BA1A6F56 for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 01:46:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.078
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.078 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ns_3Ak7yCNUf for <xmpp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 01:46:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B2D291A1B29 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 01:46:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by oies6 with SMTP id s6so1621072oie.1 for <xmpp@ietf.org>; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:46:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cridland.net; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=mdrgDHyOW2Qdy6ZeqqqEfocBoDSRxzw6KswnM+A9TeY=; b=ekTw4lGDzwsP1LKBk//5twtz6qMoUsUY0x3AUzmF73bauIbSsVqMmUjy2tpy+Iwddu VI1O35Fz3I4zcmABblhJVpmm/HYJz/pjQ7jNJHfoHgNK5Cat6HVcOmHn7PobiwW8ZE2T HmbpAza1r7ejwb5PPviZaX7xWWTuBpv0j2CBk=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=mdrgDHyOW2Qdy6ZeqqqEfocBoDSRxzw6KswnM+A9TeY=; b=jTBnfQZJqBJDnOjaSgSltck1CdZXyE7hP6QhhychczZS+4VflfylshuGA36wHxE0Le 9ZHkQs9cWiV13k7sij99mIxDXnn37JYsMB5Tq8znosi1tvZtJFP0Tg/5Rf9Zd3N1Netn XFTS3bXx0a2w4XnPJW9Kla9zb9dHPPDiKri5KaNJqjYD7oPIbhI0Z7PxfP0DbgP5bC+1 miDH49AIU2SfFis8uuOQk6EwOKvzxCT6kfuO0Sxm28gWkasF+u5WOS+G3fvePOCwQEVi P5QG4Ls5H9ou6Ake6gkw1i6MykNxI4HyBnQSTFFSDCrmB6ql1HX1mCj0jOt7JeId8EJ2 EdoQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQksNOHO3AuT28K30avSJYHBDWAEVme5J1LkH4v458cOJtcz5sBf2mP8OuxJUQ7KygCpM1r/
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.202.197.82 with SMTP id v79mr3681115oif.31.1446716802214; Thu, 05 Nov 2015 01:46:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.60.27.33 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Nov 2015 01:46:42 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <72AA7469-6C93-4C52-BAD8-99A3933FE7AC@tigase.pl>
References: <562AA40E.40407@nostrum.com> <562AAAB1.9060906@andyet.net> <72AA7469-6C93-4C52-BAD8-99A3933FE7AC@tigase.pl>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 09:46:42 +0000
Message-ID: <CAKHUCzwFSkAY-=K_21QJXJr0P5KPfDkO+XdPsDFdMqSe_0GF-Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: Bartosz Małkowski <bmalkowski@tigase.pl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113e23ca1645890523c801b6"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xmpp/s0OgfBU8YB87gUxB7iGNtij3NOw>
Cc: XMPP Working Group <xmpp@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xmpp] New(ish) draft: Secure Messaging in XMPP
X-BeenThere: xmpp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: XMPP Working Group <xmpp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/xmpp/>
List-Post: <mailto:xmpp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp>, <mailto:xmpp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 09:46:44 -0000

On 5 November 2015 at 08:42, Bartosz Małkowski <bmalkowski@tigase.pl> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I’m curious why IQ stanzas should be encapsulated into IQ stanzas instead
> of Message stanza.
> I think that any kind of stanza what should be protected by e2e encryption
> should be encrypted and encapsulated with Message stanza. Then this Message
> is only transport layer.
>
>
I think you want stanzas to be encapsulated as the same stanza in order to
maintain the same semantics on, for example, routing, error handling, etc.


> --
> Bartosz Małkowski
> Tigase Polska
> xmpp:bmalkow@malkowscy.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmpp mailing list
> xmpp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xmpp
>
>