Network Working Group                                Greg Vaudreuil
     Internet Draft                                 Octel Communications
     Expires in six months                                 Glenn Parsons
     Obsoletes: RFC 1911                               Nortel Technology
                                                          March 26, 1996
                  Voice Profile for Internet Mail - version 2
  Status of this Memo
     This document is an Internet Draft.  Internet Drafts are working
     documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas,
     and its Working Groups.  Note that other groups may also distribute
     working documents as Internet Drafts.
     Internet Drafts are valid for a maximum of six months and may be
     updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time.  It is
     inappropriate to use Internet Drafts as reference material or to cite
     them other than as a "work in progress".
     To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
     "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
     Directories on (Africa), (Europe), (Pacific Rim), (US East Coast), or (US West Coast).
     This document profiles Internet mail for voice messaging.  It
     obsoletes RFC 1911 which describes version 1 of the profile.  A list
     of changes from that document are noted in Appendix D.  As well,
     Appendix A summarizes the protocol profiles of this version of VPIM.
     Please send comments on this document to the EMA VPIM Work Group
     mailing list:  <>
  Working Group Summary
     This profile was not reviewed by an active IETF working group.
     However, it has been reviewed by the VPIM Work Group of the Electronic
     Messaging Association (EMA).  This work group, which has
     representatives from most major voice mail vendors, has held an
     interoperability demonstration between voice messaging vendors and
     received comments from traditional messaging vendors.
     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  Table of Contents
  1. ABSTRACT ............................................................3
  2. SCOPE ...............................................................4
    2.1 Voice Messaging System Limitations ...............................4
    2.2 Design Goals .....................................................5
  3. PROTOCOL RESTRICTIONS ...............................................6
  4. VOICE MESSAGE INTERCHANGE FORMAT ....................................7
    4.1 Message Addressing Formats .......................................7
    4.2 Message Header Fields ............................................9
    4.3 Voice Message Content Types .....................................14
    4.4 Other Message Content Types .....................................19
    4.5 Forwarded Messages ..............................................20
    4.6 Reply Messages ..................................................21
  5. MESSAGE TRANSPORT PROTOCOL .........................................22
    5.1 ESMTP Commands ..................................................22
    5.2 ESMTP Keywords ..................................................24
    5.3 ESMTP Parameters - MAIL FROM ....................................25
    5.4 ESMTP Parameters - RCPT TO ......................................25
    5.5 ESMTP - SMTP Downgrading ........................................26
  6. DIRECTORY ADDRESS RESOLUTION .......................................26
  7. IMAP ...............................................................27
  8. MANAGEMENT PROTOCOLS ...............................................27
    8.1 Network Management ..............................................27
  9. CONFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS ...........................................27
  10. REFERENCES ........................................................28
  11. SECURITY CONSIDERATION ............................................31
  12. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................31
  13. AUTHORS' ADDRESSES ................................................31
  14. APPENDIX A - VPIM REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ............................32
  15. APPENDIX B - EXAMPLE VOICE MESSAGES ...............................38
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                   [Page 2]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  1. Abstract
     A class of special-purpose computers has evolved to provide voice
     messaging services.  These machines generally interface to a telephone
     switch and provide call answering and voice messaging services.
     Traditionally, messages sent to a non-local machine are transported
     using analog networking protocols based on DTMF signaling and analog
     voice playback.  As the demand for networking increases, there is a
     need for a standard high-quality digital protocol to connect these
     machines.  The following document is a profile of the Internet
     standard MIME and ESMTP protocols for use as a digital voice messaging
     networking protocol. The profile is referred to as VPIM (Voice Profile
     for Internet Mail) in this document.
     This profile is based on earlier work in the Audio Message Interchange
     Specification (AMIS) group that defined a voice messaging protocol
     based on X.400 technology.  This profile is intended to satisfy the
     user requirements statement from that earlier work with the industry
     standard ESMTP/MIME mail protocol infrastructures already used within
     corporate intranets. This second version of VPIM is based on
     implementation experience and obsoletes RFC 1911 which describes
     version 1 of the profile.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                   [Page 3]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  2. Scope
     MIME is the Internet multipurpose, multimedia messaging standard.
     This document explicitly recognizes its capabilities and provides a
     mechanism for the exchange of various messaging technologies,
     primarily voice and facsimile.
     This document specifies a restricted profile of the Internet
     multimedia messaging protocols for use between voice processing
     platforms.  These platforms have historically been special-purpose
     computers and often do not have the same facilities normally
     associated with a traditional Internet Email-capable computer.  As a
     result, VPIM also specifies additional functionality as it is needed.
     This profile is intended to specify the minimum common set of features
     to allow interworking between compliant systems.
  2.1 Voice Messaging System Limitations
     The following are typical limitations of voice messaging platform
     which were considered in creating this baseline profile.
       1) Text messages are not normally received and often cannot be
       displayed or viewed.  They can often be processed only via text-to-
       speech or text-to-fax features not currently present in many of
       these machines.
       2) Voice mail machines usually act as an integrated Message
       Transfer Agent, Message Store and User Agent.  There is no relaying
       of messages, and RFC 822 header fields may have limited use in the
       context of the limited messaging features currently deployed.
       3) VM message stores are generally not capable of preserving the
       full semantics of an Internet message.  As such, use of a voice
       mail machine for gatewaying is not supported.  In particular,
       storage of recipient lists, "Received" lines, and "Message-ID" may
       be limited.
       4) Internet-style distribution/exploder mailing lists are not
       typically supported.  Voice mail machines often implement only
       local alias lists, with error-to-sender and reply-to-sender
       behavior.  Reply-all capabilities using a CC list is not generally
       5) Error reports must be machine-parsable so that helpful responses
       can be voiced to users whose only access mechanism is a telephone.
       6) The voice mail systems generally limit address entry to 16 or
       fewer numeric characters, and normally do not support alphanumeric
       mailbox names.  Alpha characters are not generally used for mailbox
       identification as they cannot be easily entered from a telephone
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                   [Page 4]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  2.2 Design Goals
     It is a goal of this profile to make as few restrictions and additions
     to the existing Internet mail protocols as possible while satisfying
     the requirements for interoperability with current generation voice
     messaging systems.  This goal is motivated by the desire to increase
     the accessibility to digital messaging by enabling the use of proven
     existing networking software for rapid development.
     This specification is intended for use on a TCP/IP network, however,
     it is possible to use the SMTP protocol suite over other transport
     protocols.  The necessary protocol parameters for such use is outside
     the scope of this document.
     This profile is intended to be robust enough to be used in an
     environment, such as the global Internet with installed-base gateways
     which do not understand MIME, though typical use is expected to be
     within corporate intranets.  Full functionality, such as reliable
     error messages and binary transport, will require careful selection of
     gateways (e.g., via MX records) to be used as VPIM forwarding agents.
     Nothing in this document precludes use of a general purpose MIME email
     packages to read and compose VPIM messages.  While no special
     configuration is required to receive VPIM compliant messages, some may
     be required to originate compliant structures.
     It is expected that a VPIM messaging system will be managed by a
     system administrator who can perform TCP/IP network configuration.
     When using facsimile or multiple voice encodings, it is suggested that
     the system administrator maintain a list of the capabilities of the
     networked mail machines to reduce the sending of undeliverable
     messages due to lack of feature support.  Configuration,
     implementation and management of this directory listing capabilities
     is a local matter.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                   [Page 5]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  3. Protocol Restrictions
     This protocol does not limit the number of recipients per message.
     Where possible, implementations should not restrict the number of
     recipients in a single message.  It is recognized that no
     implementation supports unlimited recipients, and that the number of
     supported recipients may be quite low.  However, ESMTP currently does
     not provide a mechanism for indicating the number of supported
     This protocol does not limit the maximum message length.  Implementors
     should understand that some machines will be unable to accept
     excessively long messages.  A mechanism is defined in the RFC 1425
     SMTP service extensions to declare the maximum message size supported.
     The message size indicated in the ESMTP SIZE command is in bytes, not
     minutes or seconds.  The number of bytes varies by voice encoding
     format and must include the MIME wrapper overhead.  If the length must
     be known before sending, an approximate translation into minutes or
     seconds can be performed if the voice encoding is known.
     The following sections describe the restrictions and additions to
     Internet mail protocols that are required to be compliant with this
     VPIM v2 profile. Though various SMTP, ESMTP and MIME features are
     described here, the implementor is referred to the relevant RFCs for
     complete details. It is also advisable to check for IETF drafts of
     various Internet Mail specifications that are later than the most
     recent RFCs since, for example, MIME has yet to be published as a full
     IETF Standard. The table in Appendix A summarizes the protocol details
     of this profile.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons               9/26/97                   [Page 6]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4. Voice Message Interchange Format
     The voice message interchange format is a profile of the Internet Mail
     Protocol Suite.  As such, this document assumes an understanding of
     these specifications.  Specifically, VPIM references components from
     the message format standard for Internet messages [RFC822], the
     Multipurpose Internet Message Extensions [MIME], the X.400 gateway
     specification [X.400], delivery status notification
     [DSN][DRPT][STATUS], and the electronic business card
  4.1 Message Addressing Formats
     RFC 822 addresses are based on the domain name system.  This naming
     system has two components: the local part, used for username or
     mailbox identification; and the host part, used for global machine
  4.1.1 VPIM Addresses
     The local part of the address shall be a US-ASCII string uniquely
     identifying a mailbox on a destination system.  For voice messaging,
     the local part is a printable string containing the mailbox ID of the
     originator or recipient.  While alpha characters and long mailbox
     identifiers are permitted, most voice mail networks rely on numeric
     mailbox identifiers to retain compatibility with the limited 10 digit
     telephone keypad.  As a result, some voice messaging systems may only
     be able to handle a numeric local part.  The reception of alphanumeric
     local parts on these systems may result in the address being mapped to
     some locally unique (but confusing to the recipient) number or, in the
     worst case the address could be deleted making the message un-
     replyable.  Additionally, it may be difficult to create messages on
     these systems with an alphanumeric local part without complex key
     sequences or some form of directory lookup (see 6).
     The use of the domain naming system should be transparent to the user.
     It is the responsibility of the voice mail machine to lookup the
     fully-qualified domain name (FQDN) based on the address entered by the
     user (see 6).
     In the absence of a global directory, specification of the local part
     is expected to conform to international or private telephone numbering
     plans.  It is likely that private numbering plans will prevail and
     these are left for local definition.  However, it is recommended that
     public telephone numbers be noted according to the international
     numbering plan described in [E.164]. The indication that the local
     part is a public telephone number is given by a preceding `+' (the `+'
     would not be entered from a telephone keypad, it is added by the
     system as a flag).  Since the primary information in the numeric
     scheme is contained by the digits, other character separators (e.g. `-
     ') may be ignored (i.e. to allow parsing of the numeric local mailbox)
     or may be used to recognize distinct portions of the telephone number
     (e.g. country code).  The specification of the local part of a VPIM
     address can be split into the four groups described below:
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                   [Page 7]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
       1) mailbox number
          - for use as a private numbering plan (any number of digits)
          - e.g.
       2) mailbox number+extension
          - for use as a private numbering plan with extensions
            any number of digits, use of `+' as separator
          - e.g.
       3) +international number
          - for international telephone numbers conforming to E.164
            maximum of 15 digits
          - e.g.
       4) +international number+extension
          - for international telephone numbers conforming to E.164
            maximum of 15 digits, with an extension (e.g. behind a
            PBX) that has a maximum of 15 digits.
          - e.g.
  4.1.2 Special Addresses
     Special addresses are provided for compatibility with the conventions
     of Internet mail.  These addresses do not use numeric local addresses,
     both to conform to current Internet practice and to avoid conflict
     with existing numeric addressing plans. Two special addresses are
     RESERVED for use as follows:
     By convention, a special mailbox named "postmaster" MUST exist on all
     systems.  This address is used for diagnostics and should be checked
     regularly by the system manager. This mailbox is particularly likely
     to receive text messages, which is not normal on a voice processing
     platform.  The specific handling of these messages is an individual
     implementation choice.
     If a reply to a message is not possible, such as a telephone answering
     message, then the special address _non-mail-user_ must be used as the
     originator's address.  Any text name such as "Telephone Answering," or
     the telephone number if it is available, is permitted.  This special
     address is used as a token to indicate an unreachable originator. For
     compatibility with the installed base of mail user agents,
     implementations that generate this special address MUST send a non-
     delivery notification for reply messages sent to the undeliverable
     address.  The status code for such NDN's is 5.1.1 "Mailbox does not
                 From: Telephone Answering <>
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                   [Page 8]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4.1.3 Distribution Lists
     There are many ways to handle distribution list (DL) expansions and
     none are 'standard'.  Simple alias is a behavior closest to what most
     voice mail systems do today and what is to be used with VPIM messages.
     That is:
       Reply to the originator - (Address in the RFC822 Reply-to or From
       Errors to the submitter - (Address in the MAIL FROM: field of the
                                  ESMTP exchange and the Return-Path:
                                  RFC 822 field)
     Some proprietary voice messaging protocols include only the recipient
     of the particular copy in the envelope and include no "headers" except
     date and per-message features.  Most voice messaging systems do not
     provide for "Header Information" in their messaging queues and only
     include delivery information.  As a result, recipient information MAY
     be in either the To or CC headers. If all recipients cannot be
     presented (e.g. unknown DL expansion) then the recipient headers MUST
     be omitted to indicate that an accurate list of recipients (e.g. for
     use with a reply-all capability) is not known.
  4.2 Message Header Fields
     Internet messages contain a header information block.  This header
     block contains information required to identify the sender, the list
     of recipients, the message send time, and other information intended
     for user presentation.  Except for specialized gateway and mailing
     list cases, headers do not indicate delivery options for the transport
     of messages.
     Exploder lists are noted for modifying or adding to the headers of
     messages that pass through them.  VPIM systems MUST be able to accept
     and ignore headers that are not defined here.
     The following header lines are permitted for use with VPIM voice
  4.2.1 From
     The originator's fully-qualified domain address (a mailbox address
     followed by the fully-qualified domain name).  The user listed in this
     field should be presented in the voice message envelope as the
     originator of the message.
     Systems compliant with this profile SHOULD provide the text personal
     name of the voice message originator in a quoted phrase, if the name
     is available.  Text names of corporate or positional mailboxes MAY be
     provided as a simple string. From [RFC822]
                 From: "Joe S. User" <>
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                   [Page 9]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
                 From: Technical Support <>
     The From address may be used for replies (see 4.6).  However, if the
     From address contains <non-mail-user@domain>, the user SHOULD not be
     offered the option to reply, nor should notifications be sent to this
  4.2.2 To
     The To header contains the recipient's fully-qualified domain address.
     There may be one or more To: fields in any message.
     Systems compliant to this profile SHOULD provide a list of recipients
     only if all recipients are provided.  The To header MUST NOT be
     included in the message if the sending message transport agent (MTA)
     cannot resolve all the addresses in it, e.g. if an address is a DL
     alias for which the expansion is unknown (see 4.1.3).  If present, the
     addresses in the To header MAY be used for a reply message to all
     Systems compliant to this profile MAY also discard the To addresses of
     incoming messages because of the inability to store the information.
     This would, of course, make a reply-to-all capability impossible.
  4.2.3 Cc
     The cc header contains additional recipients' fully-qualified domain
     addresses. Many voice mail systems maintain only sufficient envelope
     information for message delivery and are not capable of storing or
     providing a complete list of recipients.
     Systems compliant to this profile SHOULD provide a list of recipients
     only if all disclosed recipients can be provided.  The list of
     disclosed recipients does not include those sent via a blind copy. If
     not, systems SHOULD omit the To and Cc headers to indicate that the
     full list of recipients is unknown.
     Systems compliant to this profile MAY discard the Cc addresses of
     incoming messages as necessary.    If a list of Cc or to addresses is
     present, these addresses MAY be used for a reply message to all
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 10]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4.2.4 Date
     The Date header contains the date, time, and time zone in which the
     message was sent by the originator.  The time zone SHOULD be
     represented in a four-digit time zone offset, such as -0500 for North
     American Eastern Standard Time.  This may be supplemented by a time
     zone name in parentheses, e.g., "-0900 (PDT)".  Compliant
     implementations SHOULD be able to convert RFC 822 date and time stamps
     into local time.
                 Date: Wed, 28 Jul 96 10:08:49 -0800 (PST)
     The sending system MUST report the time the message was sent. If the
     VPIM sender is relaying a message from a system which does not provide
     a timestamp, the time of arrival at the VPIM system SHOULD be used as
     the date.  From [RFC822]
  4.2.5 Sender
     The Sender header contains the actual address of the originator if the
     message is sent by an agent on behalf of the author indicated in the
     From: field and MAY be present in a VPIM message.
     While it may not be possible to save this information in some voice
     mail machines, discarding this information or the ESMTP MAIL FROM (see
     4.2.6) address will make it difficult to send an error message to the
     proper destination. From [RFC822]
  4.2.6 Return Path
     The Return-path header is added by the final delivering SMTP server.
     If present, it contains the address from the MAIL FROM parameter of
     the ESMTP exchange (see 5.1.2) to which error messages MUST be sent to
     this address (see [DRPT] for additional details).  Note that if the
     Return-path is null ("<>"), e.g. no path, loop prevention or
     confidential, a notification MUST NOT be sent.  If the Return path
     address is not available (either from this header or the MAIL FROM
     parameter) the Sender or From addresses may be used to deliver
  4.2.7 Message-id
     The Message-id header contains a unique per-message identifier.  A
     unique message-id MUST be generated for each message sent from a
     compliant implementation.
     The message-id is not required to be stored on the receiving system.
     This identifier MAY be used for tracking, auditing, and returning
     read-receipt reports.  From [RFC822]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 11]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
                 Message-id: <>
  4.2.8 Reply-To
     If present, the reply-to header provides a preferred address to which
     reply messages should be sent (see 4.6).  If a reply-to header is
     present, a reply-to sender message MUST be sent to the address
     specified. From [RFC822]  This preferred address of the originator
     must also be provided in the originator's vCard EMAIL attribute, if
     present (see 4.3.3).
  4.2.9 Received
     The Received header contains trace information added to the beginning
     of a RFC 822 message by MTAs.  This is the only header permitted to be
     added by an MTA.  Information in this header is useful for debugging
     when using an US-ASCII message reader or a header parsing tool.
     A compliant system MUST add Received headers when acting as a gateway
     and MUST NOT remove any.  These headers MAY be ignored or deleted when
     the message is received at the final destination. From [RFC822]
  4.2.10 MIME Version
     The MIME-Version header indicates that the message conforms to the
     MIME message format specification. Systems compliant with this
     specification SHOULD include a comment with the words "(Voice 2.0)".
     RFC 1911 defines an earlier version of this profile and uses the token
     (Voice 1.0). From [MIME1][VPIM1]
                 MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)
     A MIME message that contains this header is referred to in this
     document as a VPIM Message.  However, this identifier is intended for
     information only and SHOULD NOT be used to semantically identify the
     message as being a VPIM message.  Instead, the presence of the content
     defined in [V-MSG] SHOULD be used if identification is necessary.
  4.2.11 Content-Type
     The content-type header declares the type of content enclosed in the
     message. The typical top level content in a VPIM Message SHOULD be
     multipart/voice-message, a mechanism for bundling several components
     into a single identifiable voice message.  The allowable contents are
     detailed in section 4.3 of this document.  From [MIME2]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 12]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4.2.12 Content-Transfer-Encoding
     Because Internet mail was initially specified to carry only 7-bit US-
     ASCII text, it may be necessary to encode voice and fax data into a
     representation suitable for that environment.  The content-transfer-
     encoding header describes this transformation if it is needed.
     Compliant implementations MUST recognize and decode the standard
     encodings, "Binary", "7bit, "8bit", "Base64" and "Quoted-Printable".
     The allowable content-transfer-encodings are specified in section 4.3.
     From [MIME1]
  4.2.13 Sensitivity
     The sensitivity header, if present, indicates the requested privacy
     level.  The case-insensitive values "Personal" and "Private" are
     specified. If no privacy is requested, this field is omitted.
     If a sensitivity header is present in the message, a compliant system
     MUST prohibit the recipient from forwarding this message to any other
     user.  A compliant system, however, SHOULD allow the user to reply to
     a sensitive message, but SHOULD NOT include the original message
     content.  The sensitivity of the reply message MAY be set by the user.
     If the receiving system does not support privacy and the sensitivity
     is one of "Personal" or "Private", the message MUST be returned to the
     sender with an appropriate error code indicating that privacy could
     not be assured and that the message was not delivered. A non-delivery
     notification to a private message need not be tagged private since it
     will be sent to the originator.  From: [X.400]
  4.2.14 Importance
     Indicates the requested priority to be given by the receiving system.
     The case-insensitive values "low", "normal" and "high" are specified.
     If no special importance is requested, this header may be omitted and
     the value assumed to be "normal".
     Compliant implementations MAY use this header to indicate the
     importance of a message and may order messages in a recipient's
     mailbox. From: [X400]
  4.2.15 Subject
     The subject field is often provided by email systems but is not widely
     supported on Voice Mail platforms. For compatibility with text based
     mailbox interfaces, a text subject field SHOULD be generated by a
     compliant implementation but MAY be discarded if present by a
     receiving system.  From [RFC822]
     It is recommended that voice messaging systems that do not support any
     text user interfaces (e.g. access only by a telephone) insert a
     generic subject header of "VPIM Message" for the benefit of text
     enabled recipients.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons               9/26/97                  [Page 13]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4.2.16 Disposition-Notification-To
     This header MAY be present to indicate that the sender is requesting a
     receipt notification from the receiving user agent.  This message
     disposition notification (MDN) is typically sent by the user agent
     after the user has listened to the message and consented to an MDN
     being sent
     The presence of a Disposition-notification-to header in a message is
     merely a request for an MDN described in 4.4.5.  The recipients' user
     agents are always free to silently ignore such a request so this
     header does not burden any system that does not support it.  From
  4.3 Voice Message Content Types
     MIME, introduced in [MIME1], is a general-purpose message body format
     that is extensible to carry a wide range of body parts.  It provides
     for encoding binary data so that it can be transported over the 7-bit
     text-oriented SMTP protocol.  This transport encoding is in addition
     to the audio encoding required to generate a binary object.
     MIME defines two transport encoding mechanisms to transform binary
     data into a 7 bit representation, one designed for text-like data
     ("Quoted-Printable"), and one for arbitrary binary data ("Base64").
     While Base64 is dramatically more efficient for audio data, both will
     work.  Where binary transport is available, no transport encoding is
     needed, and the data can be labeled as "Binary".
     An implementation in compliance with this profile SHOULD send audio
     and/or facsimile data in binary form when binary message transport is
     available.  When binary transport is not available, implementations
     MUST encode the audio and/or facsimile data as Base64.  The detection
     and decoding of "Quoted-Printable", "7bit", and "8bit" MUST be
     supported in order to meet MIME requirements and to preserve
     interoperability with the fullest range of possible devices.  However,
     if a content is received that cannot be rendered to the user, an
     appropriate non-delivery notification MUST be sent.
     The content types described in this section are identified for use
     within the multipart/voice-message content.  This content, which is
     the fundamental part of a VPIM message, is referred to as a VPIM voice
     message in this document.
     Each of the contents profiled subsequently can be sent within a VPIM
     voice message construct to form a simple or a more complex structure
     (several examples are given in Appendix B).  When multiple contents
     are present within the multipart/voice-message, they SHOULD be
     presented to the user in the order that they appear in the message.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 14]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4.3.1 Multipart/Voice-Message
     This MIME multipart structure provides a mechanism for packaging a
     voice message into one container that is tagged as VPIM v2 compliant.
     The semantic of multipart/Voice-Message (defined in [V-MSG]) is
     identical to multipart/mixed and may be interpreted as that by systems
     that do not recognize this content-type.
     The Multipart/Voice-Message content-type MUST only contain the
     profiled media and content types specified in this section (i.e.
     audio/*, image/*, message/rfc822 and application/directory).  The most
     common will be: spoken name, spoken subject, the message itself,
     attached fax and directory info.  Forwarded messages are created by
     simply using the message/rfc822 construct.
     Conformant implementations MUST send the Multipart/Voice-Message in a
     VPIM message.  In most cases, this Multipart/Voice-Message content
     will be the top level (i.e. in the Content-Type header).  Conformant
     implementations MUST recognize the Multipart/Voice-Message content
     (whether it is a top level content or below a mulitpart/mixed) and be
     able to separate the contents (e.g. spoken name or spoken subject).
  4.3.2 Message/RFC822
     MIME requires support of the Message/RFC822 message encapsulation body
     part.  This body part is used within a multipart/voice-message to
     forward complete messages (see 4.5) or to reply with original content
     (see 4.6). From [MIME2]
  4.3.3 Application/Directory
     This content allows for the inclusion of a Versit vCard [VCARD]
     electronic business card within a VPIM message.  The format is
     suitable as an interchange format between applications or systems, and
     is defined independent of the method used to transport it.  It
     provides a useful mechanism to transport information about the
     originator that can be used by the receiving VPIM system (see 6) or
     other local applications.
     Each VPIM message SHOULD be created with an Application/Directory
     content type [DIRECTORY] that MUST contain the preferred address and
     telephone number of the message originator and SHOULD contain the
     spoken name and the spelled name of the originator.  The intent is
     that the vCard be used as the source of information to contact the
     originator (e.g. reply, call).
     If included in a VPIM message, the vCard profile [VCARD] MUST be used
     and MUST specify at least the following attributes:
       TEL  -  Public switched telephone number in international (E.164)
               format (various types, typically VOICE)
       EMAIL - email address (various types, typically INTERNET; the type
               VPIM is optionally used to denote the address that supports
               VPIM messages)
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 15]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
     The following attributes SHOULD be specified:
       N   -   Family Name, Given Name, Additional Names, Honorific
               Prefixes, and Suffixes (all present components in the From
               text name MUST match)
       ROLE -  the role of the person identified in `N', but may be used
               as an alternative to the `N' attribute when the sender is a
               corporate or positional mailbox
       SOUND - spoken name sound data (various types, typically 32KADPCM)
       REV  -  Revision of vCard in ISO 8601 date format
     The vCard MAY use other attributes (e.g. capabilities) as defined in
     If present, the spoken name attribute MUST be denoted by a content ID
     pointing to an audio/* content elsewhere in the VPIM message.
     A typical VPIM message (i.e. no forwarded parts), MUST only contain
     one vCard -- more than one is an error condition.  A VPIM message that
     contains forwarded messages, though, may contain multiple vCards.
     However, these vCards MUST be associated with the originator(s) of the
     forwarded message(s) and the originator of the forwarding message.  As
     a result, all forwarded vCards will be contained in message/rfc822
     contents -- only the vCard of forwarding originator will be at the
          ORG:Nortel Technology
  4.3.4 Audio/32KADPCM
     An implementation compliant to this profile MUST use Audio/32KADPCM by
     default for voice [ADPCM].  Typically this body contains several
     minutes of message content, however if used for spoken name or subject
     the content should be considerably shorter (i.e. about 10 and 20
     seconds respectively).
     If an implementation can only handle one voice body, then multiple
     voice bodies (if present) SHOULD be concatenated, and SHOULD NOT be
     discarded.  It is recommended that this be done in the same order as
     they were sent. Note that if an Originator Spoken Name audio body and
     a vCard are both present in a VPIM message, the vCard SOUND attribute
     MUST point to this audio body (see 4.3.3).
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 16]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
     While any valid MIME body header MAY be used, several headers have the
     following semantics when included with this body part: Content-Description:
       This field MAY be present to facilitate the text identification of
       these body parts in simple email readers.  Any values may be used,
       though it may be useful to use values similar to those for Content-
                 Content-Description: Big Telco Voice Message Content-Disposition:
       This field MUST be present to allow the parsable identification of
       these body parts.  This is especially useful if, as is typical,
       more than one Audio/32KADPCM body occurs within a single level
       (e.g. multipart/voice-message).  Since a VPIM voice message is
       intended to be automatically played upon display of the message, in
       the order in which the audio contents occur, the audio contents are
       always of type inline. From [DISP]
       In order to distinguish between the various kinds of audio contents
       in a VPIM voice message a new disposition parameter "voice" is
       defined with the following values to be used as appropriate:
          Voice-Message - the primary voice message,
          Voice-Message-Notification - a spoken delivery notification,
          Originator-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the originator,
          Recipient-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the recipient if
            available to the originator and present if there is ONLY one
          Spoken-Subject- the spoken subject of the message, typically
            spoken by the originator
       Implementations that do not understand the "voice" parameter (or
       the Content-Disposition header) can safely ignore it, and will
       present the audio bodyparts in order (but will not be able to
       distinguish between them).
                 Content-Disposition: inline; voice=spoken-subject
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 17]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997 Content-Duration:
       This field MAY be present to allow the specification of the length
       of the audio bodypart in seconds.  The use of this field on
       reception is a local implementation issue.  From [DUR]
                 Content-Duration: 33 Content-Language:
       This field MAY be present to allow the specification of the spoken
       language of the audio bodypart.  The encoding is defined in [LANG].
       The use of this field on reception is a local implementation issue.
       Example for UK English:
                 Content-Language: EN-UK
  4.3.5 Image/TIFF
     A common image encoding for facsimile is a class of the Tag Image File
     Format (TIFF) and is defined in [TIFF-F].  While there are several
     variations of TIFF, only class F (denoted by the parameter class=F) is
     profiled for use in a VPIM voice message.
     All VPIM implementations that support facsimile MUST generate and read
     TIFF-F compatible facsimile contents in the image/TIFF; Class=F sub-
     type encoding by default.  An implementation MAY send this fax content
     in VPIM voice messages and MUST be able to recognize it in received
     messages.  If a fax message is received that cannot be rendered to the
     user (e.g. the receiving VPIM system does not support fax), then the
     system MUST non-deliver the entire message with a media not supported
  4.3.6 Proprietary Voice or Fax Formats
     Proprietary voice or fax encoding formats or other standard formats
     may be supported under this profile provided a unique identifier is
     registered with the IANA prior to use (see [MIME4]).  The voice
     encodings should be registered as sub-types of Audio and the fax
     encodings should be registered as sub-types of Image
     Use of any other encoding except Audio/32KADPCM or Image/TIFF; class=F
     reduces interoperability in the absence of explicit manual system
     configuration.  A compliant implementation MAY use any other encoding
     with explicit per-destination configuration.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 18]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4.4 Other Message Content Types
     An implementation compliant with this profile MAY send additional
     contents in a VPIM message, but ONLY outside of the multipart/voice-
     message.  The content types described in this section are identified
     for use with this profile. Contents not defined here MUST NOT be used
     without prior explicit per-destination configuration. If an
     implementation receives a VPIM message (i.e. MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice
     2.0)) that contains content types not specified in this profile, their
     handling is a local implementation issue (e.g. the unknown contents
     MAY be discarded if they cannot be presented to the recipient).
     Conversely, if an implementation receives a non-VPIM message with any
     of the contents defined in 4.3 & 4.4, it SHOULD deliver those
     contents, but the full message handling is a local issue (e.g. the
     unknown contents _or_ the entire message MAY be discarded).  It is
     recommended that implementations issue notifications to the originator
     when any form of non-delivery to the recipient occurs.
     Each of the contents defined below can be sent individually in a VPIM
     message or wrapped in a multipart/mixed to form a more complex
     structure (several examples are given in Appendix B).  When multiple
     contents are present, they SHOULD be presented to the user in the
     order that they appear in the message.
  4.4.1 Multipart/Mixed
     MIME provides the facilities for enclosing several body parts in a
     single message. Multipart/Mixed SHOULD only be used for sending
     complex voice or multimedia messages.  That is, as the top level
     Content-Type when sending one of the following contents (in addition
     to the VPIM voice message) in a VPIM message.  Compliant systems MUST
     accept multipart/mixed body parts.  From [MIME2]
  4.4.2 Text/Plain
     MIME requires support of the basic Text/Plain content type.  This
     content type has limited applicability within the voice messaging
     environment.  Compliant implementations SHOULD NOT send the Text/Plain
     content-type, but SHOULD only send this content if the recipient
     system is known to support it.  Compliant implementations MUST accept
     Text/Plain messages, however, specific handling is left as an
     implementation decision. From [MIME2]
     There are several mechanisms that can be used to support text on voice
     messaging systems including text-to-speech and text-to-fax
     conversions.  If no rendering of the text is possible (i.e. it is not
     possible for the recipient to determine if the text is a critical part
     of the message), the entire message MUST be non-delivered and returned
     to the sender with a media-unsupported error code.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 19]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  4.4.3 Multipart/report
     The Multipart/Report is used for enclosing human-readable and machine
     parsable notification (e.g. Message/delivery-status) body parts and
     any returned message content. Compliant implementations MUST use the
     Multipart/Report construct when returning messages, sending warnings,
     or issuing read receipts.  Compliant implementations MUST recognize
     and decode the Multipart/Report content type.  From [REPORT]
     Multipart/Report messages that are VPIM messages (i.e. MIME-Version:
     1.0 (Voice 2.0)) MUST include the human-readable description of the
     error as a spoken audio/* content.  Note that VPIM implementations
     MUST be able to handle (and MAY generate) Multipart/Report messages
     that encode the human-readable description of the error as text.
  4.4.4 Message/delivery-status
     This MIME body part is used for sending machine-parsable delivery
     status notifications.  Compliant implementations must use the
     Message/delivery-status construct when returning messages or sending
     warnings.  Compliant implementations must recognize and decode the
     Message/delivery-status content type and present the reason for
     failure to the user.  From [DSN]
  4.4.5 Message/Disposition-notification
     This MIME body part is used for sending machine-parsable read-receipt
     and extended-absence message disposition notifications.  Conforming
     implementations should use the Message/Disposition-notification
     construct when sending post-delivery message status notifications.
     Conforming implementations should recognize and decode the
     Message/Disposition-notification content type and present the
     notification to the user. From [MDN]
  4.5 Forwarded Messages
     VPIM version 2 explicitly supports the forwarding of voice and fax
     content with voice or fax annotation. However, only the two constructs
     described below are acceptable in a VPIM message.  Since only the
     first (i.e. message/rfc822) can be recognized as a forwarded message
     (or even mulitple forwarded messages), it is recommended that this
     construct be used whenever possible.
     Forwarded VPIM messages SHOULD be sent as a multipart/voice-message
     with the entire original message enclosed in a message/rfc822 content
     type and the annotation as a separate Audio/* or image/* body part.
     If the RFC822 headers are not available for the forwarded content,
     simulated headers with available information SHOULD be constructed to
     indicate the original sending timestamp, and the original sender as
     indicated in the "From" line.  However, note that at least one of
     "From", "Subject", or "Date" MUST be present.  As well, the
     message/rfc822 content MUST include at least the "MIME-Version",
     "Content-Type" headers, and MAY include the "Content-Transfer-
     Encoding" header. From [MIME2]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 20]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
     In the event that forwarding information is lost through concatenation
     of the original message and the forwarding annotation, such as must be
     done in a gateway between VPIM and the AMIS voice messaging protocol,
     the entire content MAY be sent as a single Audio/* segment without
     including any forwarding semantics.
  4.6 Reply Messages
     Replies to VPIM messages (and Internet mail messages) are addressed to
     the address noted in the reply-to header (see 4.2.8) if it is present,
     else the From address (see 4.2.1) is used. The vCard EMAIL attribute,
     if present, SHOULD be the same as the reply-to address and may be the
     same as the From address.  While the vCard is the senders preferred
     address it SHOULD NOT be used to generate a reply.  Also, the Return-
     path address should not be used for replies.
     Support of multiple originator headers is often not possible on voice
     messaging systems, so it may be necessary to choose only one.
     However, implementors should note that this may make it impossible to
     send error messages and replies to the proper destination.
     In some cases, a reply message is not possible, such as with a message
     created by telephone answering (i.e. classic voice mail).  In this
     case, the From field MUST contain the special address non-mail-
     user@domain (see 4.1.2).  The use of a null ESMTP MAIL FROM address
     SHOULD also be used in this case (see 5.1.2).  A receiving VPIM system
     SHOULD not offer the user the option to reply to this kind of message.
  4.7 Notification Messages
     VPIM Delivery Notification messages (4.4.4) must be sent to the
     originator of the message when any form of non-delivery of the subject
     message or its components occurs.  These error messages must be sent
     to the return path (4.2.6) if present, else the sender (4.2.5) or From
     (4.2.1) address may be used (in that order).
     VPIM Receipt Notification messages (4.4.5) should be sent to the
     sender specified in the MDN header (4.2.16), if the header is present,
     and typically after the user has initiated the notification by some
     action (like listening to the message).
     VPIM Notification messages may be positive or negative, and can
     indicate delivery at the server or receipt by the client.  However,
     the notification MUST be contained in a multipart/report container
     (4.4.3) and SHOULD contain a spoken error message.  It is recommended
     that VPIM systems that do not support the notification format SHOULD
     still send some form of error message when non-delivery occurs.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 21]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  5. Message Transport Protocol
     Messages are transported between voice mail machines using the
     Internet Extended Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (ESMTP).  All
     information required for proper delivery of the message is included in
     the ESMTP dialog.  This information, including the sender and
     recipient addresses, is commonly referred to as the message
     "envelope".  This information is equivalent to the message control
     block in many analog voice networking protocols.
     ESMTP is a general-purpose messaging protocol, designed both to send
     mail and to allow terminal console messaging.  Simple Mail Transport
     Protocol (SMTP) was originally created for the exchange of US-ASCII 7-
     bit text messages.  Binary and 8-bit text messages have traditionally
     been transported by encoding the messages into a 7-bit text-like form.
     [ESMTP] formalized an extension mechanism for SMTP, and subsequent
     RFCs have defined 8-bit text networking, command streaming, binary
     networking, and extensions to permit the declaration of message size
     for the efficient transmission of large messages such as multi-minute
     voice mail.
     The following sections list ESMTP commands, keywords, and parameters
     that are required and those that are optional for conformance to this
  5.1 ESMTP Commands
  5.1.1 HELO
     Base SMTP greeting and identification of sender.  This command is not
     to be sent by compliant systems unless the more-capable EHLO command
     is not accepted.  It is included for compatibility with general SMTP
     implementations.  Compliant implementations MUST implement the HELO
     command for backward compatibility but SHOULD NOT send it unless EHLO
     is not supported.  From [SMTP]
     Originating mailbox.  This address contains the mailbox to which
     errors should be sent.  This address may not be the same as the
     message sender listed in the message header fields if the message was
     received from a gateway or sent to an Internet-style mailing list.
     Compliant implementations MUST implement the extended MAIL FROM
     command.  From [SMTP, ESMTP]
     The MAIL FROM address MAY be passed as a local system parameter or
     placed in a Return-Path: line inserted at the beginning of a VPIM
     message.  From [HOSTREQ]
     Since error messages MUST be sent to the MAIL FROM address, the use of
     the null address ("<>") is often used to prevent looping of error
     notifications.  This null address MAY also be used to note that a
     particular message has no return path (e.g. a telephone answer
     message).  From [SMTP]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 22]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  5.1.3 RCPT TO
     Recipient's mailbox.  This field contains only the addresses to which
     the message should be delivered for this transaction.  In the event
     that multiple transport connections to multiple destination machines
     are required for the same message, this list may not match the list of
     recipients in the message header. Compliant implementations MUST
     implement the extended RCPT TO command.  From [SMTP, ESMTP]
  5.1.4 DATA
     Initiates the transfer of message data.  Support for this command is
     required in the event the binary mode command BDAT is not supported by
     the remote system.  Compliant implementations MUST implement the SMTP
     DATA command for backwards compatibility.  From [SMTP]
  5.1.5 TURN
     Requests a change-of-roles, that is, the client that opened the
     connection offers to assume the role of server for any mail the remote
     machine may wish to send.  Because SMTP is not an authenticated
     protocol, the TURN command presents an opportunity to improperly fetch
     mail queued for another destination.  Compliant implementations SHOULD
     NOT implement the TURN command.  From [SMTP]
  5.1.6 QUIT
     Requests that the connection be closed.  If accepted, the remote
     machine will reset and close the connection.  Compliant
     implementations MUST implement the QUIT command.  From [SMTP]
  5.1.7 RSET
     Resets the connection to its initial state.  Compliant implementations
     MUST implement the RSET command. From [SMTP]
  5.1.8 VRFY
     Requests verification that this node can reach the listed recipient.
     While this functionality is also included in the RCPT TO command, VRFY
     allows the query without beginning a mail transfer transaction.  This
     command is useful for debugging and tracing problems.  Compliant
     implementations MAY implement the VRFY command.  From [SMTP]
     (Note that the implementation of VRFY may simplify the guessing of a
     recipient's mailbox or automated sweeps for valid mailbox addresses,
     resulting in a possible reduction in privacy.  Various implementation
     techniques may be used to reduce the threat, such as limiting the
     number of queries per session.)  From [SMTP]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 23]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  5.1.9 EHLO
     The enhanced mail greeting that enables a server to announce support
     for extended messaging options.  The extended messaging modes are
     discussed in subsequent sections of this document.  Compliant
     implementations MUST implement the ESMTP command and return the
     capabilities indicated later in this memo.  From [ESMTP]
  5.1.10 BDAT
     The BDAT command provides a higher efficiency alternative to the
     earlier DATA command, especially for voice. The BDAT command provides
     for native binary transport of messages. Compliant implementations
     SHOULD support binary transport using the BDAT command.[BINARY]
  5.2 ESMTP Keywords
     The following ESMTP keywords indicate extended features useful for
     voice messaging.
     The "PIPELINING" keyword indicates ability of the receiving server to
     accept new commands before issuing a response to the previous command.
     Pipelining commands dramatically improves performance by reducing the
     number of round-trip packet exchanges and makes it possible to
     validate all recipient addresses in one operation.  Compliant
     implementations SHOULD support the command pipelining indicated by
     this parameter.  From [PIPE]
  5.2.2 SIZE
     The "SIZE" keyword provides a mechanism by which the SMTP server can
     indicate the maximum size message supported.  Compliant
     implementations MUST provide the size capability and SHOULD honor any
     size limitations when sending. From [SIZE]
  5.2.3 CHUNKING
     The "CHUNKING" keyword indicates that the receiver will support the
     high-performance binary transport mode.  Note that CHUNKING can be
     used with any message format and does not imply support for binary
     encoded messages. Compliant implementations SHOULD support binary
     transport indicated by this capability.  From [BINARY]
     The "BINARYMIME" keyword indicates that the SMTP server can accept
     binary encoded MIME messages. Compliant implementations SHOULD support
     binary transport indicated by this capability.  Note that support for
     this feature requires support of CHUNKING.  From [BINARY]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 24]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  5.2.5 DSN
     The "DSN" keyword indicates that the SMTP server will accept explicit
     delivery status notification requests.  Compliant implementations MUST
     support the delivery notification extensions in [DRPT].
     The "ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES" keyword indicates that an SMTP server
     augments its responses with the enhanced mail system status codes
     [CODES].  These codes can then be used to provide more informative
     explanations of error conditions, especially in the context of the
     delivery status notifications format defined in [DSN]. Compliant
     implementations SHOULD support this capability.  From [STATUS]
  5.3 ESMTP Parameters - MAIL FROM
     The current message is a binary encoded MIME messages.  Compliant
     implementations SHOULD support binary transport indicated by this
     parameter.  From [BINARY]
  5.3.2 RET
     The RET parameter indicates whether the content of the message should
     be returned.  Compliant systems SHOULD honor a request for returned
     content. From [DRPT]
  5.3.3 ENVID
     The ENVID keyword of the SMTP MAIL command is used to specify an
     "envelope identifier" to be transmitted along with the message and
     included in any DSNs issued for any of the recipients named in this
     SMTP transaction.  The purpose of the envelope identifier is to allow
     the sender of a message to identify the transaction for which the DSN
     was issued. Compliant implementations MAY use this parameter.  From
  5.4 ESMTP Parameters - RCPT TO
  5.4.1 NOTIFY
     The NOTIFY parameter indicates the conditions under which a delivery
     report should be sent. Compliant implementations MUST honor this
     request.  From [DRPT]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 25]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  5.4.2 ORCPT
     The ORCPT keyword of the RCPT command is used to specify an "original"
     recipient address that corresponds to the actual recipient to which
     the message is to be delivered.  If the ORCPT esmtp-keyword is used,
     it MUST have an associated esmtp-value, which consists of the original
     recipient address, encoded according to the rules below. Compliant
     implementations MAY use this parameter.  From [DRPT]
  5.5 ESMTP - SMTP Downgrading
     To ensure a consistent level of service across an intranet or the
     global Internet, it is essential that VPIM compliant ESMTP be
     supported at all hops between a VPIM originating system and the
     recipient system. Unfortunately, in the situation where a `downgrade'
     is unavoidable the expected result is not defined.  A downgrade is
     defined as the loss of VPIM transport features at some hop due to the
     lack of support.  For example, a relay hop may be forced (by the next
     hop) to forward a VPIM using SMTP instead of ESMTP, or using DATA
     instead of BDAT.  It is recommended that the downgrading system should
     continue to attempt to deliver the message, but MUST send an
     appropriate delivery notification to the originator, e.g. the message
     left an ESMTP host and was sent (unreliably) via SMTP.
  6. Directory Address Resolution
     It is the responsibility of a VPIM system to lookup the fully-
     qualified domain name (FQDN) based on the address entered by the user
     (if the entered address is not already a FQDN).  This would typically
     be an issue on systems that offered only a telephone user interface.
     The mapping of the dialed target number to a routable FQDN address
     allowing delivery to the destination system can be accomplished
     through implementation-specific means.
     To facilitate a local dial-by-name cache, an implementation may wish
     to populate local directories with the first and last names, as well
     as the address information extracted from received messages.  It is
     mandated that only address information from vCard attachments to VPIM
     messages be used to populate such a directory when the vCard is
     available. Addresses or names parsed from the headers of VPIM messages
     SHOULD NOT be used to populate directories as it only provides partial
     data.  Alternatively, bilateral agreements could be made to allow the
     bulk transfer of vCards between systems.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 26]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  7. IMAP
     The use of client/server desktop mailbox protocols like IMAP or POP to
     retrieve VPIM messages from a IMAP or POP message store is possible
     without any special modifications to this VPIM specification.  Email
     clients (and web browsers) typically have a table for mapping from
     MIME type to displaying application.  The audio/*, image/tiff and
     application/directory contents can be configured so that they invoke
     the correct player/recorder for rendering.  In addition with IMAP
     clients, the first multipart/mixed content (if present) will not
     appear since it is a generic part.  The user instead will be presented
     with a message that has (for example) audio and image contents.
  8. Management Protocols
     The Internet protocols provide a mechanism for the management of
     messaging systems, from the management of the physical network through
     the management of the message queues.  SNMP should be supported on a
     compliant message machine.
  8.1 Network Management
     The digital interface to the VM and the TCP/IP protocols SHOULD be
     managed.  MIB II SHOULD be implemented to provide basic statistics and
     reporting of TCP and IP protocol performance. [MIB II]
  9. Conformance Requirements
     In order to claim conformance to this document and be called `VPIM
     compliant', a voice messaging system must implement all mandatory
     features of this profile in each of three areas:  Content, Transport,
     and Notifications.  In addition, systems which conform to this profile
     must not send messages with features beyond this profile unless
     explicit per-destination configuration of these enhanced features is
     provided.  Such configuration information could be stored in a
     directory, though the implementation of this is currently a local
     It is also possible, though not encouraged, to claim conformance to
     only specific areas (e.g. VPIM content compliant) of this profile.
     The delineation of these areas is as follows:
       Content        -    Section 4, except REPORT & NOTIFY and Section 6
       Transport      -    Section 5 except NOTIFY & RET, and Section 8
       Notifications  -    REPORT & NOTIFY from Section 4, NOTIFY, RET &
                           ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES from Section 5, and all
                           notification requirements.
     A summary of compliance requirements is contained in Appendix A.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 27]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  10. References
  [8BIT] Klensin, J., Freed, N., Rose, M., Stefferud, E., D. Crocker,
      "SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransport" RFC 1426, United
      Nations University, Innosoft International, Inc., Dover Beach
      Consulting, Inc., Network Management Associates, Inc., The Branch
      Office, February 1993.
  [ADPCM] G. Vaudreuil and G. Parsons, "Toll Quality Voice - 32 kbit/s
      ADPCM:  MIME Sub-type Registration", <draft-ema-vpim-32kadpcm-
      00.txt>, January 1997.
   [AMIS-A] Audio Messaging Interchange Specifications (AMIS) - Analog
       Protocol Version 1, Issue 2, February 1992
  [AMIS-D] Audio Messaging Interchange Specifications (AMIS) - Digital
      Protocol Version 1, Issue 3 August 1993
  [BINARY] Vaudreuil, G., "SMTP Service Extensions for Transmission of
      Large and Binary MIME Messages", RFC 1830, October 1995.
  [CODES] Vaudreuil, G. "Enhanced Mail System Status Codes", RFC 1893,
  [DIRECTORY] Howes, Tim, Smith, Mark, "A MIME Content-Type for Directory
      Information" <draft-ietf-asid-mime-direct-03.txt>
  [DISP] R. Troost and S. Dorner, Communicating Presentation Information
      in Internet Messages:  The Content-Disposition Header, RFC 1806, June
  [DNS1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
      specification", RFC1035, Nov 1987.
  [DNS2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", RFC
      1034, Nov 1987.
  [DRPT] Moore, K. "SMTP Service Extensions for Delivery Status
      Notifications", RFC 1891, 01/15/1996
  [DSN] Moore, K., Vaudreuil, G., "An Extensible Message Format for
      Delivery Status Notifications", RFC 1894, 01/15/1996.
  [DUR] G. Parsons and G. Vaudreuil, "Content Duration MIME Header
      Definition", <draft-ema-vpim-dur-00.txt>, January 1997.
  [E164] CCITT Recommendation E.164 (1991), Telephone Network and ISDN
      Operation, Numbering, Routing and  Mobile Service - Numbering Plan
      for the ISDN Era.
  [ESMTP] Klensin, J., Freed, N., Rose, M., Stefferud, E., and D. Crocker,
      "SMTP Service Extensions" RFC 1869, United Nations University,
      Innosoft International, Inc., Dover Beach Consulting, Inc., Network
      Management Associates, Inc., The Branch Office, November 1995.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 28]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  [G726] CCITT Recommendation G.726 (1990), General Aspects of Digital
      Transmission Systems, Terminal Equipment - 40, 32, 24,16 kbit/s
      Adaptive Differential Pulse Code Modulation (ADPCM).
  [HOSTREQ] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application
      and Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989.
  [LANG] Alvestrand,H., "Tags for the Identification of Languages", RFC
      1766, Mar 1995
  [MDN] Fajman, Roger, "An Extensible Message Format for Message
      Disposition Notifications" <draft-ietf-receipt-MDN-03.txt>
  [MIB II] M. Rose, "Management Information Base for Network Management of
      TCP/IP-based internets:  MIB-II", RFC 1158, May 1990.
  [MIME1] N. Freed and N. Borenstein,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail
      Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC
      2045, Innosoft, First Virtual, Nov 1996.
  [MIME2] N. Freed and N. Borenstein,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail
      Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types ", RFC 2046, Innosoft, First
      Virtual, Nov 1996.
  [MIME3] K. Moore,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part
      Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text ", RFC 2047,
      University of Tennessee, Nov 1996.
  [MIME4] N. Freed, J. Klensin and J. Postel,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail
      Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", RFC 2048,
      Innosoft, MCI, ISI, Nov 1996.
  [MIME5] N. Freed and N. Borenstein,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail
      Extensions (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples ", RFC
      2049, Innosoft, First Virtual, Nov 1996.
  [PIPE] Freed, N., Cargille, A., "SMTP Service Extension for Command
      Pipelining" RFC 1854, October 1995.
  [REPORT] Vaudreuil, G., "The Multipart/Report Content Type for the
      Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages", RFC 1892,
  [RFC822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text
      Messages", STD 11, RFC 822, UDEL, August 1982.
  [SIZE] Klensin, J, Freed, N., Moore, K, "SMTP Service Extensions for
      Message Size Declaration" RFC 1870,  United Nations University,
      Innosoft International, Inc., November 1995.
  [SMTP] Postel, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10, RFC 821,
      USC/Information Sciences Institute, August 1982.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 29]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  [STATUS] Freed, N. "SMTP Service Extension for Returning Enhanced Error
      Codes", RFC 2034, 10/30/1996.
  [TIFF-F] G. Parsons and J. Rafferty, "Tag Image File Format:  Class F",
      <draft-ietf-fax-tiff-01.txt>, March 1997.
   [V-MSG] G. Vaudreuil and G. Parsons, "VPIM Voice Message:  MIME Sub-
      type Registration", <draft-ema-vpim-vmsg-00.txt> , January 1997.
   [VCARD] Dawson, Frank, Howes, Tim, "An Application/Directory MIME
      Content-Type Electronic Business Card Profile" <draft-ietf-asid-mime-
  [VPIM1] Vaudreuil, Greg, "Voice Profile for Internet Mail", RFC 1911,
      Feb 1996.
  [X.400] Hardcastle-Kille, S., "Mapping between X.400(1988) / ISO 10021
      and RFC 822", RFC 1327, May 1992.
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 30]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  11. Security Consideration
     This document is a profile of existing Internet mail protocols.  As
     such, it does not create any security issues not already existing in
     the profiled Internet mail protocols themselves.
     Further, the profile specified in this document does not in any way
     preclude the use of any Internet mail security protocol to encrypt,
     authenticate, or non-repudiate the messages.
  12. Acknowledgments
     The authors would like to offer a special thanks to the Electronic
     Messaging Association, especially the members of the Voice Messaging
     Committee, for their support of the VPIM specification and the efforts
     they have made to ensure its success.
  13. Authors' Addresses
     Glenn W. Parsons
     Nortel Technology
     P.O. Box 3511, Station C
     Ottawa, ON  K1Y 4H7
     Phone: +1-613-763-7582
     Fax: +1-613-763-8385
     Gregory M. Vaudreuil
     Octel Communications
     17080 Dallas Parkway
     Dallas, TX  75248-1905
     United States
     Phone/Fax: +1-972-733-2722
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 31]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  14. Appendix A - VPIM Requirements Summary
     The following table summarizes the profile of VPIM version 2 detailed
     in this document.  For complete explanations of each feature it is
     recommended to read the accompanying text.  The conformance table is
     separated into various columns:
       Feature - name of protocol feature (note that the indenting
                 indicates a hierarchy of conformance, i.e. the
                 conformance of a lower feature is only relevant if there
                 is comformance to the higher feature)
       Section - reference section in main text of this document
       Area - conformance area to which each feature applies:
            C - content
            T - transport
            N - notifications
       Status - whether the feature is mandatory, optional, or prohibited.
         There are three different degrees of optional used in this table:
            Must         - mandatory
            Should       - encouraged optional
            May          - optional
            Should not   - discouraged optional
            Must not     - prohibited
       Footnote - special comment about conformance for a particular
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 32]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
                           VPIM version 2 Conformance
                                                           | | | | |S| |
                                                |          | | | | |H| |F
                                                |          | | | | |O|M|o
                                                |          | | |S| |U|U|o
                                                |          | | |H| |L|S|t
                                                |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n
                                                |          |R|U|U|M| | |o
                                                |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t
                                                |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t
     FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Message Addressing Formats:                |          | | | | | | |
       Use DNS host names                       |4.1       |C|x| | | | |
       Use only numbers in mailbox IDs          |4.1.1     |C| |x| | | |
       Use alpha-numeric mailbox IDs            |4.1.1     |C| | |x| | |
       Support of postmaster@domain             |4.1.2     |C|x| | | | |
       Support of non-mail-user@domain          |4.1.2     |C| |x| | | |
       Support of distribution lists            |4.1.3     |C| |x| | | |
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Message Header Fields:                     |          | | | | | | |
       Encoding outbound messages               |          | | | | | | |
         From                                   |4.2.1     |C|x| | | | |
           Addition of text name                |4.2.1     |C| |x| | | |
         To                                     |4.2.2     |C|x| | | | |1
         cc                                     |4.2.3     |C| |x| | | |1
         Date                                   |4.2.4     |C|x| | | | |
         Sender                                 |4.2.5     |C| | |x| | |
         Return-Path                            |4.2.6     |C| | |x| | |
         Message-id                             |4.2.7     |C|x| | | | |
         Reply-To                               |4.2.8     |C| | |x| | |
         Received                               |4.2.9     |C|x| | | | |
         MIME Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)          |4.2.10    |C| |x| | | |
         Content-Type                           |4.2.11    |C|x| | | | |
         Content-Transfer-Encoding              |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | |
         Sensitivity                            |4.2.13    |C| | |x| | |
         Importance                             |4.2.14    |C| | |x| | |
         Subject                                |4.2.15    |C| |x| | | |
         Disposition-notification-to            |4.2.16    |N| | |x| | |
         Other Headers                          |4.2       |C| | |x| | |
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 33]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
                                                           | | | | |S| |
                                                |          | | | | |H| |F
                                                |          | | | | |O|M|o
                                                |          | | |S| |U|U|o
                                                |          | | |H| |L|S|t
                                                |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n
                                                |          |R|U|U|M| | |o
                                                |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t
                                                |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t
     FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e
       Detection & Decoding inbound messages    |          | | | | | | |
         From                                   |4.2.1     |C|x| | | | |
           Present text personal name           |4.2.1     |C| | |x| | |
         To                                     |4.2.2     |C|x| | | | |
         cc                                     |4.2.3     |C| | |x| | |
         Date                                   |4.2.4     |C|x| | | | |
           Conversion of Date to local time     |4.2.4     |C| |x| | | |
         Sender                                 |4.2.5     |C| | |x| | |
         Return-Path                            |4.2.6     |C| | |x| | |
         Message ID                             |4.2.7     |C|x| | | | |
         Reply-To                               |4.2.8     |C|x| | | | |
         Received                               |4.2.9     |C| | |x| | |
         MIME Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)          |4.2.10    |C| |x| | | |
         Content Type                           |4.2.11    |C|x| | | | |
         Content-Transfer-Encoding              |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | |
         Sensitivity                            |4.2.13    |C|x| | | | |2
         Importance                             |4.2.14    |C| | |x| | |
         Subject                                |4.2.15    |C| | |x| | |
         Disposition-notification-to            |4.2.16    |N| | |x| | |
         Other Headers                          |4.2       |C|x| | | | |3
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Message Content Encoding:                  |          | | | | | | |
       Encoding outbound audio/fax contents     |          | | | | | | |
         7BITMIME                               |4.3       |C| | | | |x|
         8BITMIME                               |4.3       |C| | | | |x|
         Quoted Printable                       |4.3       |C| | | | |x|
         Base64                                 |4.3       |C|x| | | | |4
         Binary                                 |4.3       |C| |x| | | |5
       Detection & decoding inbound messages    |          | | | | | | |
         7BITMIME                               |4.3       |C|x| | | | |
         8BITMIME                               |4.3       |C|x| | | | |
         Quoted Printable                       |4.3       |C|x| | | | |
         Base64                                 |4.3       |C|x| | | | |
         Binary                                 |4.3       |C|x| | | | |5
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 34]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
                                                           | | | | |S| |
                                                |          | | | | |H| |F
                                                |          | | | | |O|M|o
                                                |          | | |S| |U|U|o
                                                |          | | |H| |L|S|t
                                                |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n
                                                |          |R|U|U|M| | |o
                                                |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t
                                                |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t
     FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e
     Message Content Types:                     |          | | | | | | |
       Inclusion in outbound messages           |          | | | | | | |
         Multipart/Voice-Message                |4.3.1     |C|x| | | | |
           Message/RFC822                       |4.3.2     |C| | |x| | |
           Application/Directory                |4.3.3     |C| |x| | | |
             include TEL, EMAIL                 |4.3.3     |C|x| | | | |
             include N, ROLE, SOUND, REV        |4.3.3     |C| |x| | | |
             only one per level                 |4.3.3     |C|x| | | | |
           Audio/32KADPCM                       |4.3.4     |C|x| | | | |
             Content-Description                |   |C| | |x| | |
             Content-Disposition                |   |C|x| | | | |
             Content-Duration                   |   |C| | |x| | |
             Content-Langauge                   |   |C| | |x| | |
           Image/TIFF; class=F                  |4.3.5     |C| | |x| | |
           Audio/* or Image/* (other encodings) |4.3.6     |C| | |x| | |
         Multipart/Mixed                        |4.4.1     |C| | |x| | |
         Text/plain                             |4.4.2     |C| | | |x| |
         Multipart/Report                       |4.4.3     |N|x| | | | |
            human-readable part is voice        |4.4.3     |N|x| | | | |8
         Message/delivery-status                |4.4.4     |N|x| | | | |
         Message/disposition-notification       |4.4.5     |N| |x| | | |
         Other contents                         |4.4       |C| | | |x| |6
                                                |          | | | | | | |
       Detection & decoding in inbound messages |          | | | | | | |
         Multipart/Voice-Message                |4.3.1     |C|x| | | | |
           Message/RFC822                       |4.3.2     |C|x| | | | |
           Application/Directory                |4.3.3     |C| |x| | | |
             recognize TEL, EMAIL               |4.3.3     |C|x| | | | |
             recognize N, ROLE, SOUND, REV      |4.3.3     |C| |x| | | |
           Audio/32KADPCM                       |4.3.4     |C|x| | | | |
             Content-Description                |   |C| | |x| | |
             Content-Disposition                |   |C| |x| | | |
             Content-Duration                   |   |C| | |x| | |
             Content-Langauge                   |   |C| | |x| | |
           Image/TIFF; class=F                  |4.3.5     |C| |x| | | |
             send NDN if unable to render       |4.3.5     |C|x| | | | |7
           Audio/* or Image/* (other encodings) |4.3.6     |C| | |x| | |
         Multipart/Mixed                        |4.4.1     |C|x| | | | |
         Text/plain                             |4.4.2     |C|x| | | | |
           send NDN if unable to render         |4.4.2     |N|x| | | | |
         Multipart/Report                       |4.4.3     |N|x| | | | |
           human-readable part is voice         |4.4.3     |N|x| | | | |8
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 35]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
                                               |           | | | | |S| |
                                               |           | | | | |H| |F
                                               |           | | | | |O|M|o
                                               |           | | |S| |U|U|o
                                               |           | | |H| |L|S|t
                                               |           |A|M|O| |D|T|n
                                               |           |R|U|U|M| | |o
                                               |           |E|S|L|A|N|N|t
                                               |           |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t
     FEATURE                                   |SECTION    | | | | |T|T|e
                                               |           | | | | | | |
         Message/delivery-status               |4.4.4      |N|x| | | | |
         Message/disposition-notification      |4.4.5      |N| |x| | | |
         Other contents                        |4.4        |C| | | |x| |6
           send NDN if unable to render        |4.4        |N| |x| | | |
                                               |           | | | | | | |
       Forwarded Messages                      |           | | | | | | |
         use Message/RFC822 construct          |4.5        |C| |x| | | |
         simulate headers if none available    |4.5        |C| |x| | | |
                                               |           | | | | | | |
       Reply Messages                          |           | | | | | | |
         send to Reply-to, else From address   |4.6        |C|x| | | | |
         do not send to non-mail-user          |4.6        |C|x| | | | |
                                               |           | | | | | | |
       Notifications                           |           | | | | | | |
            use mulitpart/report format        |4.7        |N|x| | | | |
            always send error on non-delivery  |4.7        |C| |x| | | |
                                               |           | | | | | | |
     Message Transport Protocol:               |           | | | | | | |
       ESMTP Commands                          |           | | | | | | |
         HELO                                  |5.1.1      |T|x| | | | |
         MAIL FROM                             |5.1.2      |T|x| | | | |
           support null address                |5.1.2      |T|x| | | | |
         RCPT TO                               |5.1.3      |T|x| | | | |
         DATA                                  |5.1.4      |T|x| | | | |
         TURN                                  |5.1.5      |T| | | | |x|
         QUIT                                  |5.1.6      |T|x| | | | |
         RSET                                  |5.1.7      |T|x| | | | |
         VRFY                                  |5.1.8      |T| | |x| | |
         EHLO                                  |5.1.9      |T|x| | | | |
         BDAT                                  |5.1.10     |T| |x| | | |5
       ESMTP Keywords & Parameters             |           | | | | | | |
         PIPELINING                            |5.2.1      |T| |x| | | |
         SIZE                                  |5.2.2      |T|x| | | | |
         CHUNKING                              |5.2.3      |T| |x| | | |
         BINARYMIME                            |5.2.4,5.3.1|T| |x| | | |
         DSN                                   |5.2.5      |N|x| | | | |
         ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES                   |5.2.6      |N| |x| | | |
         RET                                   |5.3.2      |N| |x| | | |
         ENVID                                 |5.3.3      |N| | |x| | |
         NOTIFY                                |5.4.1      |N|x| | | | |
         ORCPT                                 |5.4.2      |N| | |x| | |
                                               |           | | | | | | |
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 36]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
                                                           | | | | |S| |
                                                |          | | | | |H| |F
                                                |          | | | | |O|M|o
                                                |          | | |S| |U|U|o
                                                |          | | |H| |L|S|t
                                                |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n
                                                |          |R|U|U|M| | |o
                                                |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t
                                                |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t
     FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e
                                                |          | | | | | | |
       ESMTP-SMTP Downgrading                   |          | | | | | | |
         send delivery report upon downgrade    |
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Directory Address Resolution               |          | | | | | | |
       provide facility to resolve addresses    |6         |C| |x| | | |
       use Vcards to populate local directory   |6         |C|x| | | | |9
       use headers to populate local directory  |6         |C| | | |x| |
                                                |          | | | | | | |
     Management Protocols:                      |          | | | | | | |
       Network management                       |8.1       |T| |x| | | |
     1.  MUST NOT include if all recipients are not known or resolvable.
     2.  If a sensitive message is received by a system that does not
        support sensitivity, then it MUST be returned to the originator
        with an appropriate error notification.  Also, a received
        sensitive message MUST NOT be forwarded to anyone.
     3.  If the addtional headers are not understood they MAY be ignored
     4.  When binary transport is not available
     5.  When binary transport is available
     6.  Other un-profiled contents must only be sent by bilateral
     7.  If the content cannot be presented in some form, the entire
        message MUST be non-delivered.
     8.  If the message is a "VPIM Message", else it MAY be text
     9.  When the vCard is present in a message
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 37]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  15. Appendix B - Example Voice Messages
     The following message is a full-featured message addressed to two
     recipients. The message includes the sender's spoken name and a short
     speech segment.  The message is marked as important and private.
     From: "Parsons, Glenn" <>
     Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 10:20:20 -0700 (CDT)
     MIME-Version: 1.0  (Voice 2.0)
     Content-type: Multipart/Voice-Message; Version=2.0;
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
     Sensitivity: Private
     Importance: High
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name
     Content-Language: EN-US
     Content-ID: part1@VM2-4321
     (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data) fgdhgd
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
     Content-Description: Brand X Voice Message
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice= Voice-Message
     Content-Duration: 25
     (This is a sample of the base64 message data) zb8tFdLTQt1PXj
     Content-type: Application/Directory
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 38]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
     The following message is a forwarded single segment voice.  Both the
     forwarded message and the forwarding message contain VCARDs with
     spoken names.
       From: "Vaudreuil, Greg" <>
       Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 10:20:20 -0700 (CDT)
       MIME-Version: 1.0  (Voice 2.0)
       Content-type: Multipart/Voice-Message; Version=2.0;
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name
       Content-Language: EN-US
       Content-ID: part3@VM2-4321
       (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data) fgdhgd
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
       Content-Description: Forwarded Message Annotation
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
       (This is the voiced introductory remarks encoded in base64)
       Content-type: Message/RFC822
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
       From: "Parsons, Glenn, W." <>
       Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 8:23:10 -0500 (EST)
       Content-type: Multipart/Voice-Message; Version=2.0;
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
       MIME-Version: 1.0  (Voice 2.0)
     Vaudreuil, Parsons               9/26/97                  [Page 39]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name
       Content-Language: EN-US
       Content-ID: part6@VM2-4321
       (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data) fgdhgd
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
       (This is the original message audio data) fgwersdfmniwrjj
       Content-type: Application/Directory
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
       Content-type: Application/Directory
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 40]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
       The following example is for a message returned to the sender by a
       VPIM gateway at for a mailbox which does not exist.
       Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 17:16:05 -0400
       From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <>
       Message-Id: <>
       Subject: Returned voice message
       MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)
       Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
       Content-Description: Spoken Delivery Status Notification
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice= Voice-Message-Notification
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
       (This is a voiced description of the error in base64)
       content-type: message/delivery-status
       Reporting-MTA: dns;
       Original-Recipient: rfc822;
       Final-Recipient: rfc822;
       Action: failed
       Status: 5.1.1 (User does not exist)
       Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 Mailbox not found
       Last-Attempt-Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 17:15:49 -0400
       content-type: message/rfc822
       [original VPIM message goes here]
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 41]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  16. Appendix C - Example Error Voice Processing Error Codes
     The following common voice processing errors and their corresponding
     status codes are given as examples.  Text after the error codes are
     intended only for reference to describe the error code.
     Implementations should provide implementation specific informative
     comments after the error code rather than the text below.
         Error condition                 RFC 1893 Error codes
         -----------------------------   ----------------------------------
         Analog delivery failed          4.4.0 Persistent connection error
         because remote system is busy         - other
         Analog delivery failed          4.4.1 Persistent protocol error
         because remote system is              - no answer from host
         Remote system did not answer    5.5.5 Permanent protocol error
         AMIS-Analog handshake ("D" in         - wrong version
         response to "C" at connect
         Mailbox does not exist          5.1.1 Permanent mailbox error
                                               - does not exist
         Mailbox full or over quota      4.2.2 Persistent mailbox error
                                               - full
         Disk full                       4.3.1 Persistent system error
                                               - full
         Command out of sequence         5.5.1 Permanent protocol error
                                               - invalid command
         Frame Error                     5.5.2 Permanent protocol error
                                               - syntax error
         Mailbox does not support FAX    5.6.1 Permanent media error
                                               - not supported
         Mailbox does not support TEXT   5.6.1 Permanent media error
                                               - not supported
         Sender is not authorized        5.7.1 Permanent security error
                                               - sender not authorized
         Message marked private, but     5.3.3 Permanent system error
         system is not private capable         - not feature capable
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 42]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
  17. Appendix D - Change History: RFC 1911 to this Document
     The updated profile in this document is based on the experience of a
     proof of concept demonstration of VPIM at EMA'96 in April 1996.  This
     version of the profile is significantly different from the previous
     described in [VPIM1].  The changes are categorized as general,
     content, transport and conformance.  They are detailed below:
     1. General
       - All definitions are now contained in separate documents that are
       referenced by this profile.  The new documents include:
          - a refined multipart/voice-message definition
          - a refined (i.e. added nibble order) audio/32KADPCM definition
          - the refined definition for image/TIFF for fax images (includes
          tag defaults for Class F)
          - the Content-Duration definition
       - Changed the Voice version to 2.0
       - Added Table of Contents and more examples
       - Various editorial updates to improve readability
     2. Content
       - Modified multipart/voice-message content by dropping the
       positional dependence of contents
       - Explicitly defined the forwarding model using message/RFC822
       - Explained the use of reply-to and from headers for addressing
       message replies
       - Deprecated the special `loopback' address because of security
       concerns and its use only for testing
       - Defined the non-mail-user reserved address to support the case in
       which replies to the originator are not possible
       - Eliminated the text name in the "To" and "CC" headers.
       Deprecated ordering of text names in the "From" header.
       - Added support for facsimile using the refined image/TIFF; class=F
       - Profiled the vCard in the application/directory body part for
       transport of directory information about the originator
       - Loosened text restriction
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 43]

     Internet Draft               VPIM v2                 March 26, 1997
       - Added additional details on delivery and receipt notifications
       - Added suggested addressing formats
       - Described handling of private messages
       - Described the handling of non-profiled contents in VPIM messages
       - Described the use of Content-Disposition to semantically identify
       audio contents
     3. Transport
       - Moved binary support to optional
       - Added optional ESMTP keywords for return of content, enhanced
       status codes, original recipient, and envelope ID
       - Described use of null MAIL FROM address
     4. Compliance
       - Added an explicit section on conformance allowing conformance to
       all or any of three conformance areas
       - Improved conformance table
     Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 9/26/97                  [Page 44]