Peter Saint-Andre | 6 Sep 23:34 2006

Re: Re: [Simple] "last call" on SIMPLE-XMPP interworking I-D

Any further input on draft-saintandre-xmpp-simple-08?

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-xmpp-simple-08.txt

If not, I'll pursue requesting a standards action regarding this I-D.

Thanks!

Peter

Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> My apologies for taking so long to incorporate our consensus. Comments
> at the end.
> 
> Dave Cridland wrote:
>> On Wed Jul 19 20:48:25 2006, Adam Roach wrote:
>>> Dave Cridland wrote:
>>>> A traditional "Jabber transport" would allow gatewaying through it
>>>> from any Jid. If instead the XMPP/SIMPLE transport only allows
>>>> gatewaying through it from its local XMPP domain, then in order to
>>>> mount the attack, the attacker has to obtain several thousand
>>>> accounts on that server.
>>> As far as I can tell, this solves the problem; however, I think it
>>> breaks the solution for most deployments as well. I foresee these
>>> gateways being deployed primarily by enterprises who are using one
>>> system (SIMPLE or XMPP) so that their users can communicate with
>>> enterprises using the other. Limiting interworking to local users
>>> makes such use impossible.
>>>
>>>
(Continue reading)


Gmane