Presence and IntComm WG

["Ben Chinowsky" <>]

*Action Items as of November 13*

[ACTION] (11/8) Mark and Jorj at Penn will work with Greg at MIT to create a
short document describing how to get Openfire running with a basic 
configuration
for PIC.edu.
[ACTION] (11/8) Tim will recruit someone to create the PIC.edu client table.
[ACTION] (11/8) Deke will draft a "why you should deploy PIC.edu" document.
[ACTION] (11/1) Tim will ask SIP.edu participants for their insights on how to
proceed with PIC.edu, and in particular how to handle user generation and
management.
[ACTION] (11/1) Tim will put the draft PIC.edu project objectives on the wiki
and invite people to start contributing there.
[ACTION] (10/4) Peter will find out if Horizon Wimba can interoperate with 
other
XMPP services, in particular whether it can do server-to-server federation.
[ACTION] (7/12) Deke and Mark will prepare a simple demo of pseudonymity in
Jabber chatrooms, for a PIC call this fall.
[ACTION] (7/12) Jonathan will recruit Tom Uram to join a PIC call.

*Attendees*

Deke Kassabian (acting chair) - Penn
Mark Sirota - Penn
Jorj Bauer - Penn
Dennis Baron - MIT
Rodney McDuff - Queensland
Randy Stout - Kansas Board of Regents
Neal McBurnett - Internet2
Ben Chinowsky (scribe) - Internet2

*Discussion*

The group agreed to use the latest version of Openfire (v3.4.1 -- see
http://www.igniterealtime.org/projects/openfire/) for the PIC.edu server. Penn
and MIT are currently running Openfire 3.3.2. Dennis noted that Jive CTO Matt
Tucker seems to be very interested in working with universities; we might be
able to get him to join a PIC call. [ACTION] Mark and Jorj at Penn will work
with Greg at MIT to create a short document describing how to get Openfire
running with a basic configuration for PIC.edu.

For PIC.edu clients, the group agreed to take the approach of documenting many
and recommending few -- along the lines of
http://www.upenn.edu/computing/im/#client , but more extensive. It was agreed
to start with a table assigning each client a rating (zero to three stars)
for its support for each of the desired features, e.g. chatrooms, chatroom
administration, and support for various platforms. This table may end up
being heavily footnoted, especially for more complex features like chatroom
adminstration. [ACTION] Tim will recruit someone to create the PIC.edu client
table.

Also, [ACTION] Deke will draft a "why you should deploy PIC.edu" document.
The group agreed to have drafts of all documentation ready for review on the
November 29 call, and to ask Peter St. Andre to join that call.

The group continued its discussion of various possible approaches to XMPP
authentication. There was general agreement that although no form of
authentication will be included in the initial version of PIC.edu, we should
include ratings for related features in the client table. It was also agreed
that the "why you should deploy PIC.edu" document should explain a) the 
problem
of lack of authentication in IM and b) how the initial deployment of PIC.edu,
which doesn't solve this problem, paves the way for future versions that do.
This document will also specify that while PIC.edu will provide a mechanism 
for
identity assurance, it will not provide multiple levels of pseudonymity.