From alex323 at gmail.com Sat Nov 5 23:14:08 2005 From: alex323 at gmail.com (Alex) Date: Sat, 05 Nov 2005 23:14:08 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Possible infinate loop flaw in CVS Message-ID: <436D8310.6090705@gmail.com> Alex and Bob are talking on a secure channel. Alex has OTR version 2. Bob is using version 1. Both Alex and Bob have OPPORTUNISTIC set. The following message is sent to Bob from Alex: (23:05:21) *Alex:* Anyway, OTRv2 has been released to CVS. The following messages are flooded back and fourth, causing an infinate loop (notice timestamps): (23:05:21) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:22) *The last message to Bob was resent.* (23:05:22) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:22) *The last message to Bob was resent.* (23:05:22) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:23) *The last message to Bob was resent.* (23:05:23) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:23) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* (23:05:23) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:23) *The last message to Bob was resent.* (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1.* (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. Warning: using old protocol version 1. *At this point, I am throttled by the AIM servers (rate limiting error). Just thought you'd like to know. - Alex -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From kat at paip.net Sun Nov 6 17:24:53 2005 From: kat at paip.net (Kat Hanna) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 17:24:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: [OTR-dev] Possible infinate loop flaw in CVS In-Reply-To: <436D8310.6090705@gmail.com> References: <436D8310.6090705@gmail.com> Message-ID: This is almost certainly because one or both of you are logged in more than once. One of your logins can't read the encrypted messages, and complains. We certainly want to fix this, but it's not trivial, and no one has the time right now. It's certainly in the plan for the future. -Kat On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Alex wrote: > Alex and Bob are talking on a secure channel. Alex has OTR version 2. > Bob is using version 1. Both Alex and Bob have OPPORTUNISTIC set. The > following message is sent to Bob from Alex: > > (23:05:21) *Alex:* Anyway, OTRv2 has been released to CVS. > > The following messages are flooded back and fourth, causing an infinate > loop (notice timestamps): > > (23:05:21) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* > (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:22) *The last message to Bob was resent.* > (23:05:22) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* > (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:22) *The last message to Bob was resent.* > (23:05:22) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* > (23:05:22) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:23) *The last message to Bob was resent.* > (23:05:23) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* > (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:23) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* > (23:05:23) *OTR Error: You transmitted a malformed data message* > (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:23) *The last message to Bob was resent.* > (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1.* > (23:05:23) *Successfully refreshed the private conversation with Bob. > Warning: using old protocol version 1. > > *At this point, I am throttled by the AIM servers (rate limiting error). > > Just thought you'd like to know. > > - Alex > From alex323 at gmail.com Sun Nov 6 19:10:33 2005 From: alex323 at gmail.com (Alex) Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 19:10:33 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Possible infinate loop flaw in CVS In-Reply-To: References: <436D8310.6090705@gmail.com> Message-ID: <436E9B79.9020500@gmail.com> Kat Hanna wrote: >This is almost certainly because one or both of you are logged in more >than once. One of your logins can't read the encrypted messages, and >complains. > > I beg to differ. We are not signed in more than once. What intrigues me is the fact that all other messages work, but the only message that causes the problem is the message with "OTRv2" in it. This leads me to believe that it is an easily fixable bug in the software. - Alex -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From alex323 at gmail.com Sun Nov 6 19:26:27 2005 From: alex323 at gmail.com (Alex) Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 19:26:27 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Problem with Systray plugin and OTR Message-ID: <436E9F33.70002@gmail.com> I use the System Tray plugin for Gaim 1.5.0. I have it configured so that when a new message is sent to me, it will be suppressed until I click on the blinking tray icon. If Bob and I have a conversation in OTRv2, I close the message window, and Bob sends me a message, the message will pop right up instead of being suppressed. In addition, when I click on the blinking icon (keeping in mind that Bob's message window is still open), the Buddy List appears while the icon continues to blink. Any way around this? - Alex -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From ian at cypherpunks.ca Sun Nov 6 20:15:40 2005 From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 20:15:40 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Possible infinate loop flaw in CVS In-Reply-To: <436E9B79.9020500@gmail.com> References: <436D8310.6090705@gmail.com> <436E9B79.9020500@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051107011540.GD847@smtp.paip.net> On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 07:10:33PM -0500, Alex wrote: > Kat Hanna wrote: > > >This is almost certainly because one or both of you are logged in more > >than once. One of your logins can't read the encrypted messages, and > >complains. > > > > > I beg to differ. We are not signed in more than once. What intrigues me > is the fact that all other messages work, but the only message that > causes the problem is the message with "OTRv2" in it. This leads me to > believe that it is an easily fixable bug in the software. Can you replicate the problem? It doesn't happen here, even when I type a message containing the string "OTRv2". Thanks, - Ian From alex323 at gmail.com Sun Nov 6 20:29:33 2005 From: alex323 at gmail.com (Alex) Date: Sun, 06 Nov 2005 20:29:33 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Possible infinate loop flaw in CVS In-Reply-To: <20051107011540.GD847@smtp.paip.net> References: <436D8310.6090705@gmail.com> <436E9B79.9020500@gmail.com> <20051107011540.GD847@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <436EADFD.3060606@gmail.com> Ian Goldberg wrote: >Can you replicate the problem? It doesn't happen here, even when I type >a message containing the string "OTRv2". > The problem is replicable. - Alex -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 827 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From ian at cypherpunks.ca Sun Nov 6 20:31:19 2005 From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sun, 6 Nov 2005 20:31:19 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Possible infinate loop flaw in CVS In-Reply-To: <436EADFD.3060606@gmail.com> References: <436D8310.6090705@gmail.com> <436E9B79.9020500@gmail.com> <20051107011540.GD847@smtp.paip.net> <436EADFD.3060606@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20051107013119.GE847@smtp.paip.net> On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 08:29:33PM -0500, Alex wrote: > Ian Goldberg wrote: > > >Can you replicate the problem? It doesn't happen here, even when I type > >a message containing the string "OTRv2". > > > The problem is replicable. You're saying every time you (using gaim-otr 3.0.0) are in an OTR conversation with someone (using gaim-otr 2.0.2), and you type "OTRv2" as part of a message, you see this behaviour? That certainly doesn't happen here. - Ian From arodland at entermail.net Thu Nov 17 03:38:09 2005 From: arodland at entermail.net (Andrew Rodland) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 03:38:09 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] otr against gaim-cvs Message-ID: <200511170338.09666.arodland@entermail.net> Is there a tree anywhere that's tracking the changes going into gaim (pre-2.0) CVS, or are the devs waiting for things to settle down first? I'm tracking gaim-cvs, so if there's an otr-cvs, I'm willing to keep on it and find out when and how it breaks :) hobbs From ian at cypherpunks.ca Thu Nov 17 08:46:28 2005 From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:46:28 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] otr against gaim-cvs In-Reply-To: <200511170338.09666.arodland@entermail.net> References: <200511170338.09666.arodland@entermail.net> Message-ID: <20051117134628.GN847@smtp.paip.net> On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 03:38:09AM -0500, Andrew Rodland wrote: > Is there a tree anywhere that's tracking the changes going into gaim (pre-2.0) > CVS, or are the devs waiting for things to settle down first? I'm tracking > gaim-cvs, so if there's an otr-cvs, I'm willing to keep on it and find out > when and how it breaks :) Someone's sent in a patch, which we'll look at when we get a chance (at the end of the month). We'll probably stick it in CVS if it looks plausible, and then you'll be able to let us know what breaks. ;-) Ah, whatever. Here's the patch that was sent in (only briefly looked at by me). Have at it, and let us know... ;-) - Ian -------------- next part -------------- diff -Naur gaim-otr-3.0.0/gtk-dialog.c gaim-otr-3.0.0-gaim2/gtk-dialog.c --- gaim-otr-3.0.0/gtk-dialog.c 2005-10-27 23:38:21.000000000 -0400 +++ gaim-otr-3.0.0-gaim2/gtk-dialog.c 2005-11-16 20:23:59.000000000 -0500 @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ #include "gtkutils.h" #include "gtkimhtml.h" #include "util.h" +#include "version.h" /* libotr headers */ #include @@ -779,7 +780,11 @@ account = gaim_accounts_find(accountname, protocol); if (!account) return -1; +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(username, account); +#else + conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM, username, account); +#endif if (!conv) return -1; gaim_conversation_write(conv, NULL, msg, GAIM_MESSAGE_SYSTEM, time(NULL)); @@ -968,7 +973,11 @@ account = gaim_accounts_find(context->accountname, context->protocol); if (!account) return; +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(context->username, account); +#else + conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM, context->username, account); +#endif if (!conv) return; dialog_update_label_conv(conv, level); } @@ -1252,7 +1261,11 @@ account = gaim_accounts_find(accountname, protocol); if (!account) return; +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(username, account); +#else + conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM, username, account); +#endif if (!conv) return; buf = g_strdup_printf("%s has ended his private conversation with you; " @@ -1406,9 +1419,13 @@ GtkWidget *whatsthis; /* Do nothing if this isn't an IM conversation */ +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 if (gaim_conversation_get_type(conv) != GAIM_CONV_IM) return; - bbox = gtkconv->bbox; +#else + if (gaim_conversation_get_type(conv) != GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM) return; + bbox = gtkconv->lower_hbox; +#endif context = otrg_plugin_conv_to_context(conv); @@ -1515,7 +1532,11 @@ GtkWidget *button; /* Do nothing if this isn't an IM conversation */ +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 if (gaim_conversation_get_type(conv) != GAIM_CONV_IM) return; +#else + if (gaim_conversation_get_type(conv) != GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM) return; +#endif button = gaim_conversation_get_data(conv, "otr-button"); if (button) gtk_object_destroy(GTK_OBJECT(button)); @@ -1531,7 +1552,11 @@ OtrlPolicy policy; /* Do nothing if this isn't an IM conversation */ +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 if (gaim_conversation_get_type(conv) != GAIM_CONV_IM) return; +#else + if (gaim_conversation_get_type(conv) != GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM) return; +#endif account = gaim_conversation_get_account(conv); name = gaim_conversation_get_name(conv); diff -Naur gaim-otr-3.0.0/otr-plugin.c gaim-otr-3.0.0-gaim2/otr-plugin.c --- gaim-otr-3.0.0/otr-plugin.c 2005-10-27 12:01:59.000000000 -0400 +++ gaim-otr-3.0.0-gaim2/otr-plugin.c 2005-11-15 21:08:51.000000000 -0500 @@ -32,11 +32,11 @@ /* gaim headers */ #include "gaim.h" -#include "core.h" #include "notify.h" #include "version.h" #include "util.h" #include "debug.h" +#include "core.h" #ifdef USING_GTK /* gaim GTK headers */ @@ -156,7 +156,11 @@ buddy = gaim_find_buddy(account, recipient); if (!buddy) return -1; +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 return (buddy->present == GAIM_BUDDY_ONLINE); +#else + return (GAIM_BUDDY_IS_ONLINE(buddy)); +#endif } static void inject_message_cb(void *opdata, const char *accountname, @@ -430,7 +434,11 @@ proto = gaim_account_get_protocol_id(acct); if (!otrg_plugin_proto_supports_otr(proto)) return; +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 act = gaim_blist_node_action_new("OTR Settings", otr_options_cb, NULL); +#else + act = gaim_blist_node_action_new("OTR Settings", otr_options_cb, NULL, NULL); +#endif *menu = g_list_append(*menu, act); } @@ -482,9 +490,17 @@ account = gaim_accounts_find(context->accountname, context->protocol); if (account == NULL) return NULL; +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(context->username, account); +#else + conv = gaim_find_conversation_with_account(GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM, context->username, account); +#endif if (conv == NULL && force_create) { +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 conv = gaim_conversation_new(GAIM_CONV_IM, account, context->username); +#else + conv = gaim_conversation_new(GAIM_CONV_TYPE_IM, account, context->username); +#endif } return conv; @@ -567,9 +583,15 @@ GAIM_CALLBACK(process_connection_change), NULL); gaim_signal_connect(blist_handle, "blist-node-extended-menu", otrg_plugin_handle, GAIM_CALLBACK(supply_extended_menu), NULL); +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 button_type_cbid = gaim_prefs_connect_callback( "/gaim/gtk/conversations/button_type", process_button_type_change, NULL); +#else + button_type_cbid = gaim_prefs_connect_callback(NULL, + "/gaim/gtk/conversations/button_type", + process_button_type_change, NULL); +#endif gaim_conversation_foreach(otrg_dialog_new_conv); @@ -642,7 +664,12 @@ /* We stick with the functions in the gaim 1.0.x API for * compatibility. */ - 1, /* major version */ +#if GAIM_MAJOR_VERSION < 2 + 1, /* major version */ +#else + /* The 2.0.x API is causing no trouble - Dustin */ + 2, /* major version */ +#endif 0, /* minor version */ GAIM_PLUGIN_STANDARD, /* type */ From arodland at entermail.net Sat Nov 19 03:25:47 2005 From: arodland at entermail.net (Andrew Rodland) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 03:25:47 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] otr against gaim-cvs In-Reply-To: <20051117134628.GN847@smtp.paip.net> References: <200511170338.09666.arodland@entermail.net> <20051117134628.GN847@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <200511190325.47920.arodland@entermail.net> On Thursday 17 November 2005 08:46 am, Ian Goldberg wrote: > On Thu, Nov 17, 2005 at 03:38:09AM -0500, Andrew Rodland wrote: > > Is there a tree anywhere that's tracking the changes going into gaim > > (pre-2.0) CVS, or are the devs waiting for things to settle down first? > > I'm tracking gaim-cvs, so if there's an otr-cvs, I'm willing to keep on > > it and find out when and how it breaks :) > > Someone's sent in a patch, which we'll look at when we get a chance (at > the end of the month). We'll probably stick it in CVS if it looks > plausible, and then you'll be able to let us know what breaks. ;-) > > Ah, whatever. Here's the patch that was sent in (only briefly looked > at by me). Have at it, and let us know... ;-) > I've been using this for a few days, and it looks pretty good. I've had one segfault that appeared to be OTR-related, but it disappeared before I could get a backtrace on it, so I don't have any idea whether it's related to gaim-cvs or not. Everything else seems to be pretty good, though; no protocol problems (not that I expected any), and the UI and gaim integration are just fine. Andrew From evan.s at dreskin.net Sun Nov 20 14:06:36 2005 From: evan.s at dreskin.net (Evan Schoenberg) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 13:06:36 -0600 Subject: [OTR-dev] Bug (with fix) in proto.h, lilbotr 3.0.0 Message-ID: <1D7CDCD9-5E39-4665-9B30-DFBED79A283A@dreskin.net> At proto.h:43 we have #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V1 0x01 #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V2 0x02 #define OTRL_POLICY_REQUIRE_ENCRYPTION 0x04 #define OTRL_POLICY_SEND_WHITESPACE_TAG 0x08 #define OTRL_POLICY_WHITESPACE_START_AKE 0x08 #define OTRL_POLICY_ERROR_START_AKE 0x10 Note that SEND_WHITESPACE_TAG and WHITESPACE_START_AKE have the same value. This is incorrect; the correct definition should be: #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V1 0x01 #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V2 0x02 #define OTRL_POLICY_REQUIRE_ENCRYPTION 0x04 #define OTRL_POLICY_SEND_WHITESPACE_TAG 0x08 #define OTRL_POLICY_WHITESPACE_START_AKE 0x10 #define OTRL_POLICY_ERROR_START_AKE 0x12 Thanks, Evan www.adiumx.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ian at cypherpunks.ca Sun Nov 20 15:37:10 2005 From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:37:10 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Bug (with fix) in proto.h, lilbotr 3.0.0 In-Reply-To: <1D7CDCD9-5E39-4665-9B30-DFBED79A283A@dreskin.net> References: <1D7CDCD9-5E39-4665-9B30-DFBED79A283A@dreskin.net> Message-ID: <20051120203710.GI847@smtp.paip.net> On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 01:06:36PM -0600, Evan Schoenberg wrote: > At proto.h:43 we have > > #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V1 0x01 > #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V2 0x02 > #define OTRL_POLICY_REQUIRE_ENCRYPTION 0x04 > #define OTRL_POLICY_SEND_WHITESPACE_TAG 0x08 > #define OTRL_POLICY_WHITESPACE_START_AKE 0x08 > #define OTRL_POLICY_ERROR_START_AKE 0x10 > > Note that SEND_WHITESPACE_TAG and WHITESPACE_START_AKE have the same > value. This is incorrect; the correct definition should be: > #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V1 0x01 > #define OTRL_POLICY_ALLOW_V2 0x02 > #define OTRL_POLICY_REQUIRE_ENCRYPTION 0x04 > #define OTRL_POLICY_SEND_WHITESPACE_TAG 0x08 > #define OTRL_POLICY_WHITESPACE_START_AKE 0x10 > #define OTRL_POLICY_ERROR_START_AKE 0x12 Good catch, but the last value should be 0x20, not 0x12. I've checked in the fix to CVS. Feel free to use the fixed version (0x10, 0x20) in Adium; it won't cause incompatibility with other clients or anything. It just so happens that that bug will never be exposed in gaim-otr or otrproxy, so I won't rush out a new release of libotr. Thanks! - Ian From paul at xelerance.com Sun Nov 20 23:53:00 2005 From: paul at xelerance.com (Paul Wouters) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 05:53:00 +0100 (CET) Subject: [OTR-dev] Bug (with fix) in proto.h, lilbotr 3.0.0 In-Reply-To: <20051120203710.GI847@smtp.paip.net> References: <1D7CDCD9-5E39-4665-9B30-DFBED79A283A@dreskin.net> <20051120203710.GI847@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, Ian Goldberg wrote: > Feel free to use the fixed version (0x10, 0x20) in Adium; it won't cause > incompatibility with other clients or anything. It just so happens that > that bug will never be exposed in gaim-otr or otrproxy, so I won't rush > out a new release of libotr. Are you sure? I've seen a few bugs related to starting or restarting (or dual starting?) sessions from a v2 to a v1 client. Lots of repeated refreshes, sometimes ending up working, sometimes not, and a rare malformed message. (not only on jabber, this actually mostly happens for me on MSN, but I also use that one mostly) Paul From ian at cypherpunks.ca Mon Nov 21 11:33:40 2005 From: ian at cypherpunks.ca (Ian Goldberg) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 11:33:40 -0500 Subject: [OTR-dev] Bug (with fix) in proto.h, lilbotr 3.0.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1D7CDCD9-5E39-4665-9B30-DFBED79A283A@dreskin.net> <20051120203710.GI847@smtp.paip.net> Message-ID: <20051121163340.GK847@smtp.paip.net> On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 05:53:00AM +0100, Paul Wouters wrote: > On Sun, 20 Nov 2005, Ian Goldberg wrote: > > > Feel free to use the fixed version (0x10, 0x20) in Adium; it won't cause > > incompatibility with other clients or anything. It just so happens that > > that bug will never be exposed in gaim-otr or otrproxy, so I won't rush > > out a new release of libotr. > > Are you sure? > I've seen a few bugs related to starting or restarting (or dual starting?) > sessions from a v2 to a v1 client. Lots of repeated refreshes, sometimes > ending up working, sometimes not, and a rare malformed message. > > (not only on jabber, this actually mostly happens for me on MSN, but I > also use that one mostly) Quite sure. There may be another bug, but it's not this one. If you can capture the incoming and outgoing messages that go by when you see this happening, I'll see if anything obvious is wrong. Thanks, - Ian