XEP-0246: End-to-End XML Streams

1. Introduction¶

XMPP as defined in XMPP Core [1] does not support direct interaction between endpoints, since it requires a client to authenticate an XML stream with a "home" server and send of all of its outbound XML stanzas through that server (which potentially can route those stanzas through a peer server for delivery to the intended recipient). However, in some scenarios it is desirable to establish end-to-end XML streams between two endpoints instead of relying on the standard client-server architecture. These scenarios include:

• Two endpoints cannot access an XMPP server
• Two endpoints want to enforce end-to-end encryption
• Two endpoints want to send a high volume of XMPP traffic but the intermediate servers enforce rate limits

The first scenario is addressed by Link-Local Messaging (XEP-0174) [2]. The second and third scenarios are addressed by Jingle XML Streams (XEP-0247) [3]. Both of those technologies result in the establishment of a direct or mediated connection between two endpoints, such as a direct TCP connection, a bytestream through SOCKS5 (SOCKS5 Bytestreams (XEP-0065) [4]) or XMPP itself (In-Band Bytestreams (XEP-0047) [5]), or other future transport methods such as RFC 6544 [6].

Once two endpoints have opened a direct or mediated connection, they can establish an XML stream over that connection for end-to-end "("e2e") communication. We call this an "e2e stream".

2. Initiating an e2e Stream¶

The initiator and recipient essentially follow the process defined in RFC 6120 [1] to establish XML streams between themselves.

First, the initiator opens an XML stream to the recipient over the negotiated transport.

<stream:stream
        xmlns='jabber:client'
        xmlns:stream='http://etherx.jabber.org/streams'
        from='romeo@forza'
        to='juliet@pronto'
        version='1.0'>

In accordance with RFC 6120 [1], the initial stream header SHOULD include the 'to' and 'from' attributes. In the case of Link-Local Messaging (XEP-0174) [2], these SHOULD be the username@machine-name advertised in the PTR record. In the case of Jingle XML Streams, these SHOULD be the bare JIDs (<localpart@domain.tld> or <domain.tld>) of the entities as communicated via XMPP.

If the initiator supports stream features and the other stream-related aspects of XMPP 1.0 as specified in RFC 6120 [1], then it SHOULD include the version='1.0' flag as shown in the previous example.

The recipient then responds with a stream header as well:

<stream:stream
        xmlns='jabber:client'
        xmlns:stream='http://etherx.jabber.org/streams'
        from='juliet@pronto'
        to='romeo@forza'
        version='1.0'>

If both the initiator and recipient included the version='1.0' flag, the recipient SHOULD also send stream features as specified in RFC 6120 [1]:

<stream:features>
  <starttls xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:xmpp-tls'/>
</stream:features>

3. Stream Encryption¶

The mere exchange of stream headers results in an unencrypted and unauthenticated channel between the two entities. The entities SHOULD upgrade the channel to an encrypted stream using the XMPP STARTTLS command defined in XMPP Core [1] using RFC 5246 [7], optionally followed by SASL negotiation for mutual authentication (see RFC 4422 [8]).

End-to-end XML streams can be negotiated between two XMPP clients, between an XMPP client and a remote XMPP service (i.e., a service with which a client does not have a direct XML stream, such as a remote Multi-User Chat (XEP-0045) [9] room), or between two remote XMPP services. Therefore, if standard X.509 certificates are used then a party to an e2e XML stream will present either a client certificate or a server certificate as appropriate. If X.509 certificates are used, they MUST at a minimum be generated and validated in accordance with the certificate guidelines guidelines provided in RFC 6120 [1]; however, applications of end-to-end XML streams MAY define supplemental guidelines for certificate validation in the context of particular architectures, such as Link-Local Messaging (XEP-0174) [2] for link-local streams and XEP-0247 for direct or mediated streams negotiated through XMPP servers.

To ease the transition from the PGP-based object encryption method specified in Current Jabber OpenPGP Usage (XEP-0027) [10], clients using TLS for e2e streams MAY use the OpenPGP TLS extension defined in RFC 5081 [11] (if available).

Use of other TLS extensions MAY be appropriate as well, including those defined in RFC 5246 [7] and RFC 5054 [12].

4. Exchanging Stanzas¶

Once the streams are established, either entity then can send XMPP message, presence, and IQ stanzas, with or without 'to' and 'from' addresses.

<message from='romeo@forza' to='juliet@pronto'>
  <body>M'lady, I would be pleased to make your acquaintance.</body>
</message>

<message from='juliet@pronto' to='romeo@forza'>
  <body>Art thou not Romeo, and a Montague?</body>
</message>

5. Ending an e2e Stream¶

To end the stream, either party closes the XML stream:

</stream:stream>

The other party then closes the stream in the other direction as well:

</stream:stream>

Both parties then SHOULD close the logical or physical connection between them.

6. Security Considerations¶

End-to-end streams SHOULD be encrypted; see the Stream Encryption section of this document.

7. IANA Considerations¶

This document requires no interaction with the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) [13].

8. XMPP Registrar Considerations¶

This document requires no interaction with the XMPP Registrar [14].

Appendices

Appendix A: Document Information¶

Series

XEP

Number

0246

Publisher

XMPP Standards Foundation

Status

Deferred

Type

Standards Track

Version

0.1.1

Last Updated

2016-01-20

Approving Body

XMPP Council

Dependencies

XMPP Core

Supersedes

None

Superseded By

None

Short Name

NOT_YET_ASSIGNED

Source Control

HTML

This document in other formats: XML  PDF

Appendix B: Author Information¶

Peter Saint-Andre

Email

stpeter@stpeter.im

JabberID

stpeter@jabber.org

URI

https://stpeter.im/

Appendix C: Legal Notices¶

Appendix D: Relation to XMPP¶

The Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) is defined in the XMPP Core (RFC 6120) and XMPP IM (RFC 6121) specifications contributed by the XMPP Standards Foundation to the Internet Standards Process, which is managed by the Internet Engineering Task Force in accordance with RFC 2026. Any protocol defined in this document has been developed outside the Internet Standards Process and is to be understood as an extension to XMPP rather than as an evolution, development, or modification of XMPP itself.

Appendix E: Discussion Venue¶

The primary venue for discussion of XMPP Extension Protocols is the <standards@xmpp.org> discussion list.

Discussion on other xmpp.org discussion lists might also be appropriate; see <https://xmpp.org/community/> for a complete list.

Errata can be sent to <editor@xmpp.org>.

Appendix F: Requirements Conformance¶

The following requirements keywords as used in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119: "MUST", "SHALL", "REQUIRED"; "MUST NOT", "SHALL NOT"; "SHOULD", "RECOMMENDED"; "SHOULD NOT", "NOT RECOMMENDED"; "MAY", "OPTIONAL".

Appendix G: Notes¶

Appendix H: Revision History¶

Note: Older versions of this specification might be available at https://xmpp.org/extensions/attic/

1. Version 0.1.1 (2016-01-20)¶

   Updated missing 'ice-tcp' reference to RFC 6544.

   XEP Editor (mam)
2. Version 0.1 (2008-06-18)¶

   Initial published version.

   psa
3. Version 0.0.1 (2008-06-13)¶

   First draft, split off from XEP-0174.

   psa

Appendix I: Bib(La)TeX Entry

@report{saint-andre2008xep0246,
  title = {End-to-End XML Streams},
  author = {Saint-Andre, Peter},
  type = {XEP},
  number = {0246},
  version = {0.1.1},
  institution = {XMPP Standards Foundation},
  url = {https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0246.html},
  date = {2008-06-13/2016-01-20},
}

END