- From: Michiel de Jong <michiel@unhosted.org>
- Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 21:18:04 +0300
- To: Evan Prodromou <evan@status.net>
- Cc: public-fedsocweb@w3.org
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Evan Prodromou <evan@status.net> wrote: > On 04/07/12 12:04 PM, Michiel de Jong wrote: >> >> But if we're going to federate, then we also need to seamlessly federate >> private messages. So what's your opinion about simply using smtp as a >> server-to-server protocol for that? > > It works fine. I'm not going to implement it, but it's just fine for whoever > wants it. > > We've got private delivery via PubSubHubbub coming in 0.4, which I think > makes a lot more sense. OK, then i think a good fedsocweb server should probably both, according to what the peer prefers and announces. is webfinger the correct place to announce the availability of PuSH and/or smtp for a given recipient? http://superfeedr-misc.s3.amazonaws.com/pubsubhubbub-core-0.4.html mentions host-meta for this, i'm now not sure anymore. I assume with PuSH 0.4 it is only possible to send private messages to people who follow you. This might be considered a feature by some, but i think if we want to say 'fedsocweb has private messaging' then we might also want that to include messages to strangers (even though the recipient might choose not to open these). for instance, how would you send a (symmetrical) friend request?
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2012 18:18:31 UTC