Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 66148 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2008 11:03:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Nov 2008 11:03:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 10368 invoked by uid 500); 6 Nov 2008 11:03:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 10237 invoked by uid 500); 6 Nov 2008 11:03:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 10225 invoked by uid 99); 6 Nov 2008 11:03:15 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:03:15 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [209.85.142.191] (HELO ti-out-0910.google.com) (209.85.142.191) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 11:01:55 +0000 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id w7so319981tib.6 for ; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:02:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.110.39.20 with SMTP id m20mr2065419tim.45.1225969355658; Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:02:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.101.104? ([124.43.215.217]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id a4sm2698949tib.4.2008.11.06.03.02.33 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:02:34 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4912CEC7.9060900@opensource.lk> Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:32:31 +0530 From: Sanjiva Weerawarana User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080505) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: general@incubator.apache.org CC: esmeproject@googlegroups.com, esme-dev@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [esmeproject:2294] Re: [ESME-dev] Re: [PROPOSAL] ESME - The Enterprise Social Messaging Experiment References: <490F87B9.7010103@fortybeans.com> <4910F9E9.6070607@opensource.lk> <3aade1dd0811041804t5a313e6cxc15e02dbcba087b1@mail.gmail.com> <49110814.4060409@opensource.lk> <3aade1dd0811041901g2a521ffas44fd87adae6a5934@mail.gmail.com> <48d391a20811041953o5188df2fq62230b686cb959@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org David Pollak wrote: > > I'm working on a secure protocol for inter-server federation. It's based on > another project I'm running called Social Material. Administrators will be > able to white/black list different servers. All server validation will be > done with SSL certs. Each message will be signed by the user who sent the > message. Each message will be encrypted based on sender and target server > such that messages can be cached by intermediate servers, but they cannot > read the message. I'm expecting that server-to-server IPC will be over > HTTP/HTTPS, but it's not manditory. Is there some reason this can't be done over XMPP? What's the value of inventing another server-to-server secure federation protocol? Sanjiva. -- Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D. Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/ Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/ Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/ Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org