Logs for jdev
[00:16:03] * Zash left the chat.
[00:23:09] * harrykar left the chat.
[00:39:16] * MattJ left the chat.
[01:13:00] * tofu left the chat.
[01:18:00] * waqas left the chat.
[01:34:46] * Maranda joined the chat.
[01:35:05] * Maranda left the chat.
[01:47:53] * naw left the chat.
[02:40:34] * evilotto left the chat.
[02:48:46] * scippio left the chat.
[03:38:10] * tofu joined the chat.
[04:23:01] * niekie left the chat.
[04:29:57] * tofu left the chat.
[05:33:24] * nabatt joined the chat.
[05:40:37] * Fabian joined the chat.
[06:04:25] * teo left the chat.
[06:04:26] * teo joined the chat.
[06:15:48] * marseille joined the chat.
[06:19:59] * Tobias joined the chat.
[06:22:25] * Alex joined the chat.
[06:26:34] * thkoch2001 joined the chat.
[06:30:50] * harrykar joined the chat.
[06:47:28] * thkoch2001 left the chat.
[07:05:53] * gigam left the chat.
[07:11:26] * nabatt left the chat.
[07:12:22] * rtreffer left the chat.
[07:13:58] * rtreffer joined the chat.
[07:17:01] * rtreffer left the chat.
[07:18:02] * rtreffer joined the chat.
[07:23:48] * marseille left the chat.
[07:31:44] * jonas joined the chat.
[07:46:13] * teo left the chat.
[07:46:13] * teo joined the chat.
[07:47:14] * teo left the chat.
[07:47:41] * teo joined the chat.
[07:53:19] * rtreffer left the chat.
[08:02:32] * Fabian left the chat.
[08:16:24] * Alex left the chat.
[08:22:50] * Tobias left the chat.
[08:26:44] * waqas joined the chat.
[08:28:11] * nikita joined the chat.
[08:28:47] * nabatt joined the chat.
[08:32:14] * petermount joined the chat.
[08:38:15] * Fabian joined the chat.
[08:46:20] * Fabian left the chat.
[08:46:26] * waqas left the chat.
[08:57:53] * Fabian joined the chat.
[09:02:00] * harrykar left the chat.
[09:14:34] * Fabian left the chat.
[09:14:34] * Fabian joined the chat.
[09:22:31] * thkoch2001 joined the chat.
[09:26:25] * luca tagliaferri joined the chat.
[09:34:34] * naw joined the chat.
[09:44:12] * rtreffer joined the chat.
[09:53:46] * Tobias joined the chat.
[10:12:38] * naw left the chat.
[10:16:57] * Fabian left the chat.
[10:16:57] * Fabian joined the chat.
[10:28:07] * harrykar joined the chat.
[10:37:18] * jcea joined the chat.
[10:37:20] * bartender left the chat.
[10:37:57] * bartender joined the chat.
[10:38:24] * bartender left the chat.
[10:38:44] * bartender joined the chat.
[10:50:17] * Alex joined the chat.
[10:56:25] * scippio joined the chat.
[11:12:07] * waqas joined the chat.
[11:26:50] * bartender left the chat.
[11:28:13] * naw joined the chat.
[11:30:10] * bartender joined the chat.
[11:37:09] * Fabian left the chat.
[11:49:29] * luca tagliaferri left the chat.
[12:38:55] <Alex> 9 of 10 messages in identi.ca are Spam today :(
[12:39:41] <louiz’> not that much, but yeah, a lot are
[12:43:40] * harrykar left the chat.
[12:46:44] <Alex> louiz’: looks like I am subscribed to teh wrong groups only ;-)
[12:47:06] <louiz’> maybe ;)
[12:56:46] * Tobias left the chat.
[13:06:28] * Maranda joined the chat.
[13:10:09] * Fabian joined the chat.
[13:16:09] * luca tagliaferri joined the chat.
[13:24:00] * Fabian left the chat.
[13:30:14] * teo left the chat.
[13:30:54] * harrykar joined the chat.
[13:32:25] * waqas left the chat.
[14:00:02] * bLaDe- joined the chat.
[14:00:52] * Alex left the chat.
[14:06:50] * bLaDe- left the chat.
[14:09:21] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[14:19:02] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[14:24:24] * Fabian joined the chat.
[14:25:45] * tofu joined the chat.
[14:28:09] * rtreffer left the chat.
[14:32:23] * rtreffer joined the chat.
[14:44:58] * nabatt left the chat.
[14:45:58] * Tobias joined the chat.
[14:49:18] * Fabian left the chat.
[14:57:33] * rtreffer left the chat.
[15:03:05] * DocGreen joined the chat.
[15:04:20] * deryni joined the chat.
[15:07:06] <DocGreen> hi
[15:09:03] <Kev> Hello.
[15:10:25] <DocGreen> Is this the right place for information about xmpp and its capabilities?
[15:10:50] <Kev> You can ask.
[15:11:32] * hawke joined the chat.
[15:11:42] <DocGreen> i was wondering, if you could use xmpp for file syncing over multiple machines
[15:12:13] * Fabian joined the chat.
[15:13:10] <DocGreen> i stumbled across jakeapp.com while i was searching for an alternative to dropbox and co
[15:13:38] <DocGreen> and obiously that is not an ongoing project anymore
[15:15:01] <Kev> You could use it for that if you wanted.
[15:15:13] <Kev> XMPP is, at its core, just a message switching system.
[15:15:41] <Kev> Then with assorted extensions that let it do things like IM services, file transfers, VOIP, whatever.
[15:15:49] * rtreffer joined the chat.
[15:17:27] <DocGreen> but does it make sense? it would be a nice idea to have such capabilities, but i could imagine some issues i am not thinking
of right now
[15:23:01] <Kev> Well, you've not really said much about what you want to do.
[15:23:24] <Kev> If you want to have some service that you log into and that different machines can send a message to each other saying "Please
take this file from me" then it'll work fine.
[15:24:30] <DocGreen> yeah basically thats it: I want to log on on multiple machines with the same id and then want each system to be able to announce
new files and changes to files
[15:24:56] <Kev> You could easily build such a system with XMPP.
[15:25:30] <DocGreen> so i can get rid of all those "cloud" services
[15:26:14] * niekie joined the chat.
[15:26:47] <DocGreen> that is the main intention, to have synced data between multiple machines and os' without a third party involved like dropbox
inc. ubuntu one and however they call themselves
[15:27:48] <Kev> Well, there's still an XMPP server involved.
[15:27:56] <Kev> You could, of course, control that server yourself.
[15:29:26] <DocGreen> of course, but i could setup one on my own, and i could use that one only for the syncing communication and let the clients
connect directly
[15:30:31] <DocGreen> so the server manages the messages about new files and all the data necessary but the clients exchange their files directly
without using the bandwidth of the server
[15:32:19] <Kev> Right.
[15:32:28] * tofu left the chat.
[15:32:49] <Kev> Although you can always fall back to the server for inband transfer if other methods fail (only if it's your server though,
doing that through jabber.org or similar would be really antisocial).
[15:33:12] <DocGreen> exactly
[15:39:41] <DocGreen> I came across jakeapp and the idea was striking simple, lots of people use their messengers daily and on multiple machines.
so it seemed to be a logical thing to assume, syncing of files should be done over their im-accounts
[15:41:21] <DocGreen> now i have to find someone to program that :)
[15:47:38] * naw left the chat.
[15:50:57] * rtreffer left the chat.
[15:53:58] * DocGreen left the chat.
[16:03:48] * bear joined the chat.
[16:04:39] * evilotto joined the chat.
[16:04:52] * DocGreen joined the chat.
[16:05:21] * DocGreen left the chat.
[16:05:51] * rtreffer joined the chat.
[16:07:42] * jonas left the chat.
[16:14:35] * Fabian left the chat.
[16:15:02] * niekie left the chat.
[16:16:13] * marseille joined the chat.
[16:18:41] * petermount left the chat.
[16:27:14] * tofu joined the chat.
[16:34:56] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[16:36:13] * luca tagliaferri left the chat.
[16:43:28] * niekie joined the chat.
[16:47:51] * Fabian joined the chat.
[16:53:02] * jkhii joined the chat.
[16:59:07] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[17:00:48] * stpeter joined the chat.
[17:04:57] * Florob joined the chat.
[17:22:17] * Ludovic joined the chat.
[17:22:51] * Ludovic left the chat.
[18:05:38] * Ludovic joined the chat.
[18:06:53] * teo joined the chat.
[18:09:29] <stpeter> heh, someone in my roster has a buggy client, because his presence says "X is Online [I'm not here right now]"
[18:09:44] <stpeter> auto-away problems :)
[18:11:36] <louiz’> :D
[18:24:40] * Florob left the chat.
[18:24:43] * Florob joined the chat.
[18:31:31] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[18:32:52] * rtreffer left the chat.
[18:41:00] * marseille left the chat.
[18:48:44] * srldd joined the chat.
[18:49:37] <srldd> anyone available for a quick question on clustered xmpp servers
[18:50:04] <srldd> ?
[18:53:18] <srldd> Do clustered xmpp servers sync presences to all servers within the cluster, or do individual nodes only care about who is
connected locally and pass on any presence requests to all other nodes in the cluster?
[18:54:43] * marseille joined the chat.
[18:55:33] <deryni> That sounds likely to be implementationally defined to me. Though there may very well be reasons one or the other is necessary
(that a server author would know that I don't).
[18:55:41] <Maranda> srldd, hmm google shows me these prominently? http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0051.html
[18:55:49] * Ludovic left the chat.
[18:55:57] <Maranda> http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0110.html
[18:55:57] * guus joined the chat.
[18:56:54] <Maranda> Otherwise I don't know.
[18:58:39] <Maranda> both xeps are also deferred.
[18:58:45] <guus> Hello. I've got a question on XEP-0124 (bosh). Paragraph 6 states that content MUST NOT contain (...) Internal or external
DTD subsets; Internal or external entity references (with the exception of predefined entities).
[18:59:24] <guus> my questions: a) can internal or external entities be defined in the content
[18:59:32] * Ludovic joined the chat.
[19:00:06] <guus> b) what exactly are "internal or external DTD subsets" ? How do I recognize them (I have a hard time understanding XML 1.0
in that respect)
[19:03:12] <deryni> Quick read: <doctype> blocks or the representation of external sources of <doctype> blocks but I wouldn't quote me on that.
[19:04:21] <srldd> Hi Maranda, the first one applies more closely than the 2nd. I believe the first requires that users be assigned to a specific
node within the cluster. I'm not sure if this is the common implementation of most xmpp servers with cluster capabilities
and that is why I'm asking. Curious as to what the common practice is here.
[19:07:51] <Maranda> guus I guess it means that you don't want <!DOCTYPE or <!ELEMENT within the <body/> of the request
[19:08:04] <Maranda> diggin a bit on DTD in XML
[19:08:11] <guus> that's what I expect
[19:08:31] <guus> (at least for !ELEMENT, I wasn't sure on !DOCTYPE)
[19:08:50] <guus> but the phrasing of the entity references is confusing me a little
[19:09:37] <guus> where it says 'references', is it implying that entities cannot be defined, or that the existing entity references cannot
be used.
[19:09:39] <Maranda> srldd, I'm not sure what's best, never attempted to do clustering with xmpp servers so I'm not really clueful on what is usually
done.
[19:10:41] <srldd> Thanks for trying :) Just hoping someone might have some experience in here with it.
[19:10:51] <deryni> I don't think either of those XEPs is really relevant to the question.
[19:10:52] <guus> the addition of the text "with the exception of predefined entities" implies usage, not definition.
[19:11:55] * thkoch2001 left the chat.
[19:12:06] <Florob> guus, indeed. I read that as usage too
[19:13:08] <deryni> I'd read that as disallowing definition of entities as well, but still not my area of expertise.
[19:13:20] <deryni> But either way an entity definition wouldn't really be an entity reference.
[19:14:26] * zanchin left the chat.
[19:14:39] * zanchin joined the chat.
[19:17:00] <Florob> guus, that restriction actually stems from XMPP Core. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6120#section-11.1
[19:17:48] <guus> ah, I didn't realize that
[19:17:58] <guus> stpeter: any thoughts?
[19:19:51] * MattJ joined the chat.
[19:22:04] * Treebilou left the chat.
[19:28:16] <MattJ> srldd, clustering really does depend on the implementation
[19:28:37] * Zash joined the chat.
[19:37:39] * gigam joined the chat.
[19:39:35] * teo left the chat.
[19:39:35] * teo joined the chat.
[19:40:18] <Florob> guus, may I ask where you're coming from with that question? Do you have any need for entities?
[19:41:03] <guus> I'm having a first stab at an implementation
[19:41:15] * Zash left the chat.
[19:41:16] <guus> writing some unit tests
[19:41:19] <guus> this popped up
[19:41:31] <guus> a server-sided implementation, that is.
[19:44:27] * mlundblad joined the chat.
[19:44:31] <srldd> Hi MattJ, I'm asking which implementations are more common, presence syncing model or discovery model
[19:45:13] <MattJ> srldd, well it's hard to go on, considering there aren't that many implementations that actually do clustering
[19:45:56] <MattJ> ejabberd I believe is the broadcast-to-all-nodes model, though someone with more knowledge of ejabberd internals might be
able to say with more confidence than I
[19:46:24] <srldd> My concern with that model is if you have a split between subsets of nodes
[19:46:36] <srldd> the resync could be enormous if you have a lot of users
[19:48:31] <deryni> I'm not sure ejabberd is sync-to-all, I'd actually assume it isn't given its message-passing/process-ness. That being said
their might very well be core datastructure/storage that everyone updates.
[19:48:53] <deryni> I do know that it doesn't (last I knew anyway) handle disjoint nodes very well at all and that resync was often somewhat painful.
[19:50:48] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[20:00:42] * hawke left the chat.
[20:01:16] * marseille left the chat.
[20:01:23] <guus> more on the subject of XEP-0124
[20:01:24] * hawke joined the chat.
[20:01:54] <guus> what does this actually say? "The <body/> wrapper MUST contain zero or more complete XML immediate child elements"
[20:02:22] <guus> that any child elements must be 'complete' ?
[20:02:36] <MattJ> It must be valid XML, etc.
[20:02:57] <MattJ> <body><foo>part 2 follows in the next reque...</body> is not valid
[20:03:11] <MattJ> Just in case anyone tries it :)
[20:03:20] * marseille joined the chat.
[20:03:46] * stpeter left the chat.
[20:04:17] <guus> valid as in well-formed?
[20:04:27] * luca tagliaferri joined the chat.
[20:05:03] <MattJ> Yes
[20:06:19] <guus> "The <body/> wrapper MUST be well-formed" would perhaps have been less ambiguous then
[20:12:13] <Florob> oh someone will do <body><message></body> then
[20:12:35] <MattJ> Oh for sure they will
[20:12:46] <MattJ> You should see the things I have seen :)
[20:12:48] <darkrain_> augh
[20:13:01] <MattJ> ...in pubsub
[20:13:06] <deryni> I think I like my eyes and brain too much for that.
[20:13:07] <darkrain_> That's like when I copy stanzas from Pidgin's debug window and send them to a MUC (and then see the resulting stanza in the
debug window)
[20:13:25] <guus> ok, ok, I'll leave the spec-writing to those more qualified. My apologies for the arrogance ;)
[20:13:50] <MattJ> guus, oh, the specs aren't all roses, feedback is valued :)
[20:38:35] * Ludovic left the chat.
[20:42:02] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[20:42:07] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[20:50:50] * Fabian left the chat.
[21:05:54] * hawke left the chat.
[21:05:57] * hawke joined the chat.
[21:08:35] * srldd left the chat.
[21:18:49] * MattJ left the chat.
[21:34:06] <guus> gna gna
[21:34:11] <guus> http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0124.html <http://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0124.html#wrapper>
[21:34:26] <guus> paragraph 9 and 23 introduce some HTML anchor issues ;)
[21:47:56] * Tobias left the chat.
[22:10:35] * guus left the chat.
[22:16:05] * mlundblad left the chat.
[22:17:02] * jameschurchman joined the chat.
[22:32:09] * jameschurchman left the chat.
[22:33:00] * louiz’_ joined the chat.
[22:51:44] * Florob left the chat.
[22:52:55] * marseille left the chat.
[23:07:40] * scippio left the chat.
[23:08:00] * scippio joined the chat.
[23:14:24] * scippio left the chat.
[23:24:00] * srldd joined the chat.
[23:27:31] <srldd> Are individual presences probes sent for every contact on a users list even if some of those contacts are on the same remote
server? Also, when users server sends initial broadcast of presence to those subscribed to user, are there individual broadcasts
for each subscription or 1 broadcast per remote server for all subscribed contacts on that remote server?
[23:27:31] * louiz’ left the chat.
[23:29:18] * louiz’_ in now known as louiz’.
[23:29:39] <srldd> RFC http://xmpp.org/rfcs/rfc3921.html#presence wasn't very clear other than to say there was no To attribute
[23:30:55] <darkrain_> The core and IM specs were recently updated, so you should reference http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6121
[23:31:14] <darkrain_> To answer your questions though, yes, individual probes per contact.
[23:31:23] <srldd> thanks for the link, reading now, and thanks for the answer
[23:31:29] <darkrain_> and one initial broadcast per entity on remote server
[23:31:43] <srldd> I wasn't sure if there was an attempt to reduce the number of packets sent to a remote server if multiple contacts resided
there
[23:31:59] <darkrain_> I think there has been talk of an extension which allowed for optimizations there (or at least there was talk of optimizations
on the XMPP W-G list), but never any agreement
[23:32:40] <srldd> have they though of perhaps at the users server level modifying the xml to have To attribute with all contacts on that server
listed?
[23:33:53] <srldd> ex: srldd@jabber.org and I have 3 contacts at xmpp.org, send a msg to xmpp.org with to: contact1, contact2, contact3
[23:46:30] * hawke left the chat.
[23:49:36] * srldd left the chat.