Subject: Re: text conferencing at the 55th IETF meeting in Atlanta

From: Jeffrey Altman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:10:02 EST

Can someone fix the X.509 certificate that is used to protect the TLS
sessions with conference.ietf.jabber.org ?

The hostname is wrong so verification fails.

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 23:09:56 +0100

I have tried both JabberFox and TVJab on MacOSX and can just not get it 
to work.

JabberFox just dies, and can not even connect to my jabber server for 
some weird reason.

TVJab works fine with the jabber server I connect to (psg.com) 
including conferencing there, but I can not manage to connect to 
conference rooms organized for this meeting (i.e. I can only choose 
things at psg.com, not jabber.org).

Other jabber clients for MacOSX (Fire!, Proteus) seem to not handle 
conferences.

Anyone succeeded that can come close to my laptop during the meeting 
and try to see what's up?

    paf

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 20:37:47 -0600 (CST)

Admittedly the Jabber clients for MacOS are sub-optimal. Hopefully that
situation will be remedied in time for San Francisco.

Peter

--
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
http://www.jabber.org/people/stpeter.php

---

From: Patrik Fältström <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 12:42:59 +0100

On tisdag, nov 19, 2002, at 03:37 Europe/Stockholm, Peter Saint-Andre 

> situation will be remedied in time for San Francisco.

Problem resolved:

(a) JabberFox works. I have no clue why it didn't the 50 times I tried 
earlier yesterday. Now it does.

(b) TVJab is unable to connect to a chat room at a conference server 
which is not the same/known by the jabber server you connect to. I 
don't really know if this is a server configuration, or bug/lack of 
feature in the client.

So, my recommendation: If you use MacOSX, JabberFox is what you should 
go with.

     THANKS to everyone which have sent me private email!

         paf

---

From: Leslie Daigle <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 10:46:21 -0500

Let me say I really like the text conferencing experiment
so far.  It's pretty cool to get a chance to have an idea
of what's going on in sessions you can't split yourself
to attend.

It'd be interesting to see more people attending the
text conference; in other (non-IETF) meetings I've seen 
interaction (as opposed to watching the scribe; or, as 
helping the scribe).  Might, or might not, scale well...

Leslie.

Patrik Fältström wrote:
> which is not the same/known by the jabber server you connect to. I don't 
> really know if this is a server configuration, or bug/lack of feature in 
> the client.
> 

-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"An essential element of a successful journey
    is recognizing when you have arrived."
   -- ThinkingCat  (c.1983 - 2002)

Leslie Daigle
[email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Marshall Rose <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 11:10:30 -0500

> of what's going on in sessions you can't split yourself
    
thanks. certainly the unexpected result (for me) is that it's really
useful for the attendees -- initially, i thought this was primarily
going to be a big help for folks who couldn't physically get to the meeting.
    
/mtr

---

From: Scott W Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 16:51:25 -0500

> going to be a big help for folks who couldn't physically get to the meeting.

I predicted that it would come to be the real meeting, while the meeting
in the room would be a hollow shell.  That didn't quite happen, but it
might in the future.  Jabber feels like a crippled medium, though.
Howsabout we put together a cvw (http://cvw.sourceforge.net) environment
for next time?

---

From: Graham Klyne <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 21:03:55 +0000

It's common practice for W3C to use IRC during teleconferences and 
face-to-face meetings, from which minutes can be derived.  The combination 
works pretty well when I have been involved.  Jabber seems to work better 
than IRC because, on logging in to a conference a record from the 
conference so far is displayed (on my client, anyway).  This is really 
handy when connections go up and down.

Cool tool!

#g
--

At 11:10 AM 11/19/02 -0500, Marshall Rose wrote:
>-
>This message was passed through [email-masked], which
>is a sublist of [email-masked]. Not all messages are passed.
>Decisions on what to pass are made solely by Raffaele D'Albenzio.

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<[email-masked]>

---

From: Franck Martin <[email-masked]>
Date: 21 Nov 2002 00:43:00 +1200

The ultimate trick would be to have a speech to text recognition
software... So whoever is talking appears as text in the conference
room...

This would be the lowest bandwidth capable conference system...

Additional question, does jabber uses multicast or anycast for
conferencing?

Cheers.

        
        
    /mtr

---

From: John Stracke <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 09:23:46 -0500

> This would be the lowest bandwidth capable conference system...

Not to mention the most entertaining.  :-) Your average speech-to-text 
engine (I use ViaVoice for programming) needs serious training, and 
would need heavy customization to be able to recognize the IETF vocabulary.

I dictated this line from the impp session:

> Proposal is to use a randomizer in the initial counter value - it 
> replaces the SPI, and is larger than the SPI field, using smaller IV 
> and counter

and got:

> Proposal list use randomizes minister come to value it places the SPI 
> and is larger than the S P I felt using smaller and counter

That's pretty good, but hardly up to the level needed for holding a 
meeting--and this is with an engine trained to my voice.

-- 
/===========================================\
|John Stracke      [email-masked]  |
|Principal Engineer|http://www.centivinc.com|
|Centiv            |My opinions are my own. |
|===========================================|
|I'm a .sig virus...and, boy, am I tired!   |
\===========================================/

---

From: Ted Hardie <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 07:47:15 -0800 (PST)

A sinner speaks...I find this is increasing a bad habit to do a
"blasts shields up" view of my laptop instead of paying attention to
the wgs.  I'm personally trying to cut that back, and I'd
recommend to others who are similarly easily addicted to the glow of their
screens that this could be a dangerous toy.
				Ted

---

From: George Michaelson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 02:02:06 +1000

Looking for words to express the sense of frustration when you have a bloody
interesting session, you have saved bloody interesting Qs from the floor, you
have people on jabber who want to see the stuff, and the f***$%#^D network
dies on you, so you can't put the stuff into the jabber session at the
murphys-law point of most utility...

-George