Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

XEPs and RFCs support page with version #38

Closed
Neustradamus opened this issue Mar 15, 2018 · 14 comments
Closed

XEPs and RFCs support page with version #38

Neustradamus opened this issue Mar 15, 2018 · 14 comments

Comments

@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member

Neustradamus commented Mar 15, 2018 •
edited
Loading

It is possible to have a XEPs and RFCs support page with version (XEP-XXXX v1.2)?

Examples:
@apparentlymart
Copy link
Member

There is a page for this on our old, and generally abandoned wiki: http://djabberd.pbworks.com/w/page/10247069/Standards%20Support

As far as I know, the situation has not changed since that page was last updated.

@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks @apparentlymart :)
Hope help for new devs one day, for an update (RFCs and XEPs) and for have a next doc with version...
All plugins are not here on https://github.com/djabberd/ ?

20180317 : http://djabberd.pbworks.com/w/page/10247069/Standards%20Support
RFC-3920: XMPP Core
RFC-3921: XMPP IM and Presence
XEP-0030: Service Discovery -> Basic support built in; can be extended by plugins.
XEP-0045: Multi-User Chat -> Basic support via DJabberd::MUC plugin.
XEP-0049: Private XML Storage -> Via DJabberd::Plugin::PrivateStorage plugin.
XEP-0077: In-Band Registration -> Via hooks; Supported by some Authentication providers.
XEP-0092: Software Version -> Via DJabberd::Plugin::JabberIqVersion plugin.
XEP-0199: XMPP Ping -> Via DJabberd::Plugin::Ping plugin.
XEP-0202: Entity Time -> Via DJabberd::EntityTime plugin.

@rufferson
Copy link
Contributor

You can take a look here also
https://github.com/rufferson/DJabberd/wiki/XEP-Coverage
But that's a fork, since no PRs are accepted it's unlikely to land in the master

@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member Author

Neustradamus commented Sep 6, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@rufferson Whaouuuu always a development on DJabberd! :)

For the wiki page, can you add XEP version? Example: XEP-0045 v1.2
And XMPP RFCs too because there are difference between old and new...

Look all forks to integrate all not integrated commits!
https://github.com/djabberd/DJabberd/network look forks since November 2008.
Examples:

In more XMPP Compliance Suites: #37
I have added a ticket for an important part: SCRAM: #40

@rufferson
Copy link
Contributor

RFC Coverage is more or less described on the landing page.

I did review fastmailops fork earlier and some I've already implemented differently by that time and others without context I don't see what exactly they are trying to solve.

XEP Version is a good hint btw, need to add. Perhaps rather namespace as there could be minor xep reviews without namespace bump.

@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member Author

Neustradamus commented Sep 6, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Have you looked other forks from main project? Since commits in November 2008.

This page needs to be updated ^^

And really look changes between old RFCs and new...
RFC6120: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6120#appendix-D
RFC6121: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6121#appendix-E
RFC6122: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6122#appendix-C
RFC7622: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7622#appendix-A

Look all XMPP RFCs: xsf/xmpp.org#414

@Neustradamus Neustradamus changed the title XEPs support page with version XEPs and RFCs support page with version Sep 6, 2019
@rufferson
Copy link
Contributor

Yes the statement in core support section is based on those appendices, with clarification below what is there and what is missing. Feel free to send me required markdown changes :)
Perhaps better will be just to run compliance test and provide the results. As for instance StartTLS patches allowed me to hit A/A grades on IM Observatory badge.

@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member Author

What is the tested server?

@rufferson
Copy link
Contributor

my home server running djabberd 0.86+ (from my forked branch) - that actually the main driver behind my motivation, to make djabberd secure and compliant modern xmpp server. the only missing piece though is MUC as I don't do group chats with my family. So MIX is somewhere at the bottom of TODO list.

@Neustradamus Neustradamus mentioned this issue Oct 26, 2020
Open
@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member Author

@rufferson:

About XMPP RFCs:

Difference noted in RFCs:

Note:

@rufferson
Copy link
Contributor

This is exactly what I mean, you cannot introduce breaking changes in RFC (non-errata) - you need to make a new RFC which will obsolete (or correct semantic) of the other one. So saying we support RFC6121 means exactly that, regardless of its revision. The correction like in RFC7590 (and others, like nodeprep) are correcting behaviour of specific subsystem or interaction with other protocols/standards.
Same stands for xeps, except they differentiate semantic (specified by namespace) and subsystem (specified by xep number).

@rufferson
Copy link
Contributor

I've updated wiki with RFC and XEP coverage, feel free to correct it where/as appropriate

@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member Author

@rufferson: Thanks for https://github.com/djabberd/DJabberd/wiki/XEP-Coverage!

Like I have specified in the main text, the problem is that there is not the version of XEPs...
Example: XEP-XXXX v1.2

The goal is to do a state of play which will be necessary to easy update.

Please remove the old: https://github.com/rufferson/DJabberd/wiki/XEP-Coverage

@Neustradamus
Copy link
Member Author

@rufferson:

RFC3920 -> RFC6120

RFC3921 -> RFC6121

Draft but Very Important:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@apparentlymart @Neustradamus @rufferson