6 ms·

If you feel that it could improve, contribute to the IRCv3 working group! http://ircv3.net/ http://ircv3.net/

by fluxsauce 10y ago

toomuchtodo 10y ago
What's the timeline for getting IRCv3 ratified?
- voltagex_ 10y ago
  Ratified with/by who?
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    Perhaps ratified is the wrong word. When is v3 going to be solidified where we'll see production implementation of the spec/new features?
    - voltagex_ 10y ago
      As far as I know, v3 features are already in use on some servers. e.g. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687798 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687798 There's also an IRCv3 section on blog.irccoud.com but I can't access it from here.
  - oarsinsync 10y ago
    Whatever relevant working group would be responsible for standard ratification within the IETF, much like RFCs 1459 and 2812?
rspeer 10y ago
Why is IRCv3 still relegating chat history to "IRC bouncers" instead of making it a feature of the protocol? Chat history makes chat more usable, and it makes it usable at all on intermittent connections.
- herbst 10y ago
  why would they include that? (Seriously curious) As far as i can tell it would add no benefit but only overhead to the protocol.
  - angry-hacker 10y ago
    My opinion is because it's the vital feature, after sending and receiving images itself, that irc needs. It's like asking why would http protocol allow users to send data. Receiving is enough.
  - Snowdax 10y ago
    Regulation. Having a full record of important conversations to fall back to for legal reasons is a big part of both corporate and governmental policies. Clinton's emails being deleted being an example of why ethereal messages are not taken lightly
  - rspeer 10y ago
    Are you okay with missing messages, or do you only ever communicate with people over an always-on wired connection?
    - herbst 10y ago
      IMO thats the magic of IRC. Channels i care about i bounce, channels i do not care i dont bounce in. If messages would wait for me that would mean so much overhead for the protocol. I like IRC because its simple. I've build a IRC out of boredom, and a bouncer because the one i used missed a feature i wanted. Please nobody take that simplicity away :/
    - herbst 10y ago
      I just thought about the server implementation. This is simply not dueable. IRC servers are ment to run thousands of users, caching messages would be awful.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

If you feel that it could improve, contribute to the IRCv3 working group! http://ircv3.net/ http://ircv3.net/

toomuchtodo 10y ago

What's the timeline for getting IRCv3 ratified?

voltagex_ 10y ago
Ratified with/by who?
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  Perhaps ratified is the wrong word. When is v3 going to be solidified where we'll see production implementation of the spec/new features?
  - voltagex_ 10y ago
    As far as I know, v3 features are already in use on some servers. e.g. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687798 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687798 There's also an IRCv3 section on blog.irccoud.com but I can't access it from here.
- oarsinsync 10y ago
  Whatever relevant working group would be responsible for standard ratification within the IETF, much like RFCs 1459 and 2812?

rspeer 10y ago

Why is IRCv3 still relegating chat history to "IRC bouncers" instead of making it a feature of the protocol? Chat history makes chat more usable, and it makes it usable at all on intermittent connections.

herbst 10y ago
why would they include that? (Seriously curious) As far as i can tell it would add no benefit but only overhead to the protocol.
- angry-hacker 10y ago
  My opinion is because it's the vital feature, after sending and receiving images itself, that irc needs. It's like asking why would http protocol allow users to send data. Receiving is enough.
- Snowdax 10y ago
  Regulation. Having a full record of important conversations to fall back to for legal reasons is a big part of both corporate and governmental policies. Clinton's emails being deleted being an example of why ethereal messages are not taken lightly
- rspeer 10y ago
  Are you okay with missing messages, or do you only ever communicate with people over an always-on wired connection?
  - herbst 10y ago
    IMO thats the magic of IRC. Channels i care about i bounce, channels i do not care i dont bounce in. If messages would wait for me that would mean so much overhead for the protocol. I like IRC because its simple. I've build a IRC out of boredom, and a bouncer because the one i used missed a feature i wanted. Please nobody take that simplicity away :/
  - herbst 10y ago
    I just thought about the server implementation. This is simply not dueable. IRC servers are ment to run thousands of users, caching messages would be awful.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]