moparisthebest/xeps
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/moparisthebest/xeps synced 2024-11-25 02:32:18 -05:00
Code Issues Releases Wiki Activity

0.4

Browse Source 
git-svn-id: file:///home/ksmith/gitmigration/svn/xmpp/trunk@959 4b5297f7-1745-476d-ba37-a9c6900126ab
This commit is contained in:
Peter Saint-Andre 2007-06-15 18:54:36 +00:00
parent c057ae9f41
commit f3b2836282
2 changed files with 20 additions and 7 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

13
xep-0211.xml
View File

@ -25,6 +25,12 @@
<supersededby/> <supersededby/>
<shortname>N/A</shortname> <shortname>N/A</shortname>
&stpeter; &stpeter;
<revision>
<version>0.4</version>
<date>2007-06-14</date>
<initials>psa</initials>
<remark><p>Per community discussion, changed XMPP Core and XMPP IM references back to RFCs with recommendation for developers to also consult bis drafts; added reference to XEP-0178; suggested bundling of root certificate for XMPP ICA.</p></remark>
</revision>
<revision> <revision>
<version>0.3</version> <version>0.3</version>
<date>2007-06-11</date> <date>2007-06-11</date>
@ -61,11 +67,11 @@
<th>Requirement Level</th> <th>Requirement Level</th>
</tr> </tr>
<tr> <tr>
<td><strong>&rfc3920bis;</strong></td> <td><strong>&rfc3920;</strong></td>
<td>REQUIRED *</td> <td>REQUIRED *</td>
</tr> </tr>
<tr> <tr>
<td><strong>&rfc3921bis;</strong></td> <td><strong>&rfc3921;</strong></td>
<td>REQUIRED *</td> <td>REQUIRED *</td>
</tr> </tr>
<tr> <tr>
@ -85,10 +91,11 @@
<td>RECOMMENDED</td> <td>RECOMMENDED</td>
</tr> </tr>
</table> </table>
<p>* Note: &xmppcore; and &xmppim; are currently being revised to incorporate errata and feedback based on implementation experience; because it is expected that the revision process will be complete well before this compliance level takes effect, developers are advised to implement the specifications as defined in draft-saintandre-rfc3920bis and draft-saintandre-rfc3921bis rather than RFC 3920 and RFC 3921.</p> <p>* Note: RFC 3920 and RFC 3921 are currently being revised to correct errors, clarify matters that were underspecified, and incorproate feedback based on implementation and deployment experience gained since RFC 3920 and RFC 3921 were published in 2004. Although the compliance level specified herein refers to RFC 3920 and RFC 3921, developers are also advised to consult &rfc3920bis; and &rfc3921bis;, which provide the most up-to-date and accurate description the core XMPP protocols.</p>
</section1> </section1>
<section1 topic='Implementation Notes' anchor='impl'> <section1 topic='Implementation Notes' anchor='impl'>
<p>Some of the protocol specifications referenced herein have their own dependencies; developers must refer to the relevant specifications for further information.</p> <p>Some of the protocol specifications referenced herein have their own dependencies; developers must refer to the relevant specifications for further information.</p>
<p>Developers are advised to refer to &xep0178; regarding proper implementation of the SASL EXTERNAL mechanism in XMPP. Given the wide deployment of domain certificates issued by the XMPP Intermediate Certification authority, developers should also consider bundling the root certificate of the &SFSCA; with their software. <note>The root certificate is located at "http://cert.startcom.org/ca.crt", to be superseded in future years by the root certificate located at "http://cert.startcom.org/sfsca.crt". It is not necessary for clients to bundle the ICA certificate since the full certificate chain should be presented by deployed servers.</note></p>
</section1> </section1>
<section1 topic='Security Considerations' anchor='security'> <section1 topic='Security Considerations' anchor='security'>
<p>This document introduces no additional security considerations above and beyond those defined in the documents on which it depends.</p> <p>This document introduces no additional security considerations above and beyond those defined in the documents on which it depends.</p>

14
xep-0212.xml
View File

@ -19,13 +19,18 @@
<spec>XEP-0030</spec> <spec>XEP-0030</spec>
<spec>XEP-0078</spec> <spec>XEP-0078</spec>
<spec>XEP-0086</spec> <spec>XEP-0086</spec>
<spec>XEP-0115</spec>
<spec>XEP-0138</spec> <spec>XEP-0138</spec>
</dependencies> </dependencies>
<supersedes/> <supersedes/>
<supersededby/> <supersededby/>
<shortname>N/A</shortname> <shortname>N/A</shortname>
&stpeter; &stpeter;
<revision>
<version>0.4</version>
<date>2007-06-15</date>
<initials>psa</initials>
<remark><p>Per community discussion, changed XMPP Core and XMPP IM references back to RFCs with recommendation for developers to also consult bis drafts; added reference to XEP-0178; suggested bundling of root and intermediate certificates for XMPP ICA.</p></remark>
</revision>
<revision> <revision>
<version>0.3</version> <version>0.3</version>
<date>2007-06-11</date> <date>2007-06-11</date>
@ -62,11 +67,11 @@
<th>Requirement Level</th> <th>Requirement Level</th>
</tr> </tr>
<tr> <tr>
<td><strong>&rfc3920bis;</strong></td> <td><strong>&rfc3920;</strong></td>
<td>REQUIRED *</td> <td>REQUIRED *</td>
</tr> </tr>
<tr> <tr>
<td><strong>&rfc3921bis;</strong></td> <td><strong>&rfc3921;</strong></td>
<td>REQUIRED *</td> <td>REQUIRED *</td>
</tr> </tr>
<tr> <tr>
@ -86,11 +91,12 @@
<td>RECOMMENDED</td> <td>RECOMMENDED</td>
</tr> </tr>
</table> </table>
<p>* Note: &xmppcore; and &xmppim; are currently being revised to incorporate errata and feedback based on implementation experience; because it is expected that the revision process will be complete well before this compliance level takes effect, developers are advised to implement the specifications as defined in draft-saintandre-rfc3920bis and draft-saintandre-rfc3921bis rather than RFC 3920 and RFC 3921.</p> <p>* Note: RFC 3920 and RFC 3921 are currently being revised to correct errors, clarify matters that were underspecified, and incorproate feedback based on implementation and deployment experience gained since RFC 3920 and RFC 3921 were published in 2004. Although the compliance level specified herein refers to RFC 3920 and RFC 3921, developers are also advised to consult &rfc3920bis; and &rfc3921bis;, which provide the most up-to-date and accurate description the core XMPP protocols.</p>
<p>** Note: Support for XEP-0078 and XEP-0086 is recommended for backward compatibility only. It is likely that compliance definitions for future years will remove these recommendations.</p> <p>** Note: Support for XEP-0078 and XEP-0086 is recommended for backward compatibility only. It is likely that compliance definitions for future years will remove these recommendations.</p>
</section1> </section1>
<section1 topic='Implementation Notes' anchor='impl'> <section1 topic='Implementation Notes' anchor='impl'>
<p>Some of the protocol specifications referenced herein have their own dependencies; developers must refer to the relevant specifications for further information.</p> <p>Some of the protocol specifications referenced herein have their own dependencies; developers must refer to the relevant specifications for further information.</p>
<p>Developers are advised to refer to &xep0178; regarding proper implementation of the SASL EXTERNAL mechanism in XMPP. Given the wide deployment of domain certificates issued by the XMPP Intermediate Certification authority, developers should also consider bundling the root certificate of the &SFSCA; with their software. <note>The root certificate is located at "http://cert.startcom.org/ca.crt", to be superseded in future years by the root certificate located at "http://cert.startcom.org/sfsca.crt". It is recommended for servers to also bundle the ICA certificate since the full certificate chain should be presented by deployed servers; the ICA certificate is located at "http://cert.startcom.org/sub.class1.xmpp.ca.crt".</note></p>
</section1> </section1>
<section1 topic='Security Considerations' anchor='security'> <section1 topic='Security Considerations' anchor='security'>
<p>This document introduces no additional security considerations above and beyond those defined in the documents on which it depends.</p> <p>This document introduces no additional security considerations above and beyond those defined in the documents on which it depends.</p>