[JDEV] IETF, Jabber, etc..

[Anders Qvist]

On Fri, 10 Sep 1999, Thomas D. Charron wrote:

[snip]
> 	The IMPP standard is geared at MORE then JUST IM, and IM is
> what we've been looking at, but there is MUCH more to it then I
> would have thought about BEFORE the meeting.  Presence notification
> is a whole different ball of wax then just simple IM, and giving the
> ability to IM accross networks, etc.. 
> 
> 	Now, I'm not saying that IMPP and jabber don't mix.  I'm just
> saying we're currently working more on one particular layer of the
> cake.  A long time ago, in an archive far far away, someone said
> while we where discussing feature negotiation, that a client may
> respond to a file transfer with "Please Don't, I'm a TOASTER".  I
> still love that line, but here's my getcha.  What can jabber, as it
> stands now, or even in the near future, going to DO for a toaster?
> My toaster certainly won't have a buddy list, so when I turn it on,
> it's isn't going to announce it's presence, nor would I want it to.
> But how can I get data from it?  Do I want it on a buddy list?  Hell
> no.  May I want to get data to it or from it, hell YA!  Right now,
> we're not in that direction. 
> 
> 	One of the things that came out of the pulver.com summit is
> that we're in a big, BIG world, and there's more to IM and presence
> then we seem to be looking at.  The Cisco, Worldnet, and even
> Erikson guys made some points that made me think. 
> 
> 	Now, we're getting the structure to our system, but we really,
> REALLY need to look and make sure we don't lock ourselves into a
> 'software IM' system alone.  Our design is helpfull in that fact,
> but my concern is unity between identities.  Now that I've gone thru
> that, I have an idea to really hurt peoples heads.. 
[snip]
> 	This is the type of thing that the IMPP will give the ability
> to do.  Cisco and several other names that where there WANT this to
> get in.  It's the new buzz word..  'Presence'.. 
> 
> 	Hypothetically, this COULD all be incorperated into
> jabbertransport as it stands now, but why?  IM is one thing,
> presence is totally different. 
> 
> 	I'll shadap now, and sorry to all who have a hard time reading
> my dejanews posts becouse they don;t wrap for you. 
> 
> 	Jer, please add on to this, becouse it had alot to do with the
> 'bigger picture' that we saw whole there. 

*Systems* may be required to be all things to all people. That does
not mean that Jabber needs to solve all these problems. When the time
comes, let us start a project to do presence stuff.

The people at the pulver.com meeting were mainly from the commercial
world, right? Their software/hardware needs to solve all problems,
or the buyer will take his/her money elsewhere, right? That is why MS
Word does all things but nothing well.

We don't need to reason like that. Our software is free. If there is
need for a presence mechanism, it will be done. If Jabber is well
established at the time, it will very likely be the platform a
presence project will start out from. If they make persuasive a
argument that Jabber itself needs extension, we will do it then. In my
opinion, the OSS community has proved again and again that integrating
or extending free software is rarely difficult where there is a real
need.

In short, let's take one thing at a time. Don't worry so much if we're
doing the right thing. We can worry about that when we're done. Let us
keep an open mind and focus on the goal.

Don't read me wrong. I don't say that we shouldn't think about presence
or any other part of the Universe Jabber may come into contact with. I
just want to say: "Think about this - *then* go forth and conquer!"

Anders "Quest" Qvist
NetGuide Scandinavia

And we who listen to the sky, or walk the dusty grade,
Or break the very atoms down, to see how they are made,
Or study cells, or living things, seek truth with open hand;
The profoundest act of worship is to try to understand.

-- Catherine Faber, "The Word of God"