[Search] [pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02                                                      
  Network Working Group                                 Greg Vaudreuil

  Internet Draft                                   Lucent Technologies
  Expires in six months                                  Glenn Parsons
  Obsoletes: RFC 2421                                  Nortel Networks
                                                      October 28, 1999


               Voice Profile for Internet Mail - version 2

                     <draft-ema-vpim-vpimv2r2-02.txt>



Status of this Memo

  This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
  all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

  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".

     The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
     http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

     The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
     http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

  To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
  "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
  Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe),
  munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or
  ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999).  All Rights Reserved.
  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


Overview

  This document profiles Internet mail for voice messaging.  It
  obsoletes RFC 2421 which describes version 2 of the profile with less
  precision.  A list of changes from that document are noted in
  Appendix F.  As well, Appendix A summarizes the protocol profiles of
  this version of VPIM.

Please send comments on this document to the IETF VPIM mailing list:
  <vpim@lists.neystadt.org>

Working Group Summary

  This document is a deliverable of the draft charter of the IETF VPIM
  BOF.  This document is intended as a revision of VPIM v2 [RFC 2421]
  for the purposes of elevating its maturity status.  No protocol
  changes should be made from RFC 2421 but this document is hoped to be
  a more precise profile.




































  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 2]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


Table of Contents

1.   ABSTRACT..........................................................4
2.   SCOPE.............................................................5
 2.1  Voice Messaging System Limitations ..............................5
 2.2  Design Goals ....................................................6
3.   PROTOCOL RESTRICTIONS.............................................7
4.   VOICE MESSAGE INTERCHANGE FORMAT..................................8
 4.1  Message Addressing Formats ......................................8
 4.2  Message Header Fields ..........................................11
 4.3  MIME Audio Content Descriptions ................................19
 4.4  Voice Message Content Types ....................................20
 4.5  Other MIME Content Types .......................................25
 4.6  Return and Notification Messages ...............................27
 4.7  Forwarded Messages .............................................29
 4.8  Reply Messages .................................................29
 4.9  Notification Messages ..........................................30
5.   MESSAGE TRANSPORT PROTOCOL.......................................31
 5.1  ESMTP Commands .................................................31
 5.2  ESMTP Keywords .................................................33
 5.3  ESMTP Parameters - MAIL FROM ...................................34
 5.4  ESMTP Parameters - RCPT TO .....................................35
 5.5  ESMTP - SMTP Downgrading .......................................35
6.   DIRECTORY ADDRESS RESOLUTION.....................................36
7.   MANAGEMENT PROTOCOLS.............................................36
 7.1  Network Management .............................................36
8.   CONFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS.........................................37
9.   SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS..........................................38
 9.1  General Directive ..............................................38
 9.2  Threats and Problems ...........................................38
 9.3  Security Techniques ............................................39
10.  REFERENCES.......................................................39
11.  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..................................................42
12.  COPYRIGHT NOTICE.................................................42
13.  AUTHORS' ADDRESSES...............................................43
14.  APPENDIX A - VPIM REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY...........................44
15.  APPENDIX B - EXAMPLE VOICE MESSAGES..............................52
16.  APPENDIX C - EXAMPLE ERROR VOICE PROCESSING ERROR CODES..........57
17.  APPENDIX D - EXAMPLE VOICE PROCESSING DISPOSITION TYPES..........58
18.  APPENDIX E - IANA REGISTRATIONS..................................59
 18.1   vCard EMAIL Type Definition for VPIM .........................59
 18.2   Voice Content-Disposition Parameter Definition ...............59
19.  APPENDIX F - CHANGE HISTORY: RFC 2421 (VPIM V2) TO THIS DOCUMENT.61











  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 3]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


1. Abstract

  Voice messaging evolved as telephone answering service into a full
  send, receive, and forward messaging paradigm with unique message
  features, semantics and usage patterns. Voice messaging was
  introduced on special purpose computers that interface to a telephone
  switch and provide call answering and voice messaging services.
  Traditionally, messages sent from one voice messaging system to
  another were transported using analog networking protocols based on
  DTMF signaling and analog voice playback.  As the demand for
  networking increases, there was a need for a standard high-quality
  digital protocol to connect these machines.  VPIM has successfully
  demonstrated its usefulness as this new standard.  VPIM is widely
  implemented and is seeing deployment in early adopter customer
  networks. This document clarifies ambiguities found in the earlier
  specification and is consistent with implementation practice. The
  profile is referred to as VPIM (Voice Profile for Internet Mail) in
  this document.

  This second revision of the version 2 of obsoletes RFC 2421 which
  less precisely describes version 2 of the profile.

































  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 4]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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
  server 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
     easily 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 typically
     no relaying of messages, and RFC 822 header fields may have limited
     use in the context of the limited messaging features currently
     deployed.

     3) Voice mail 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 are not generally
     available.

     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
     terminal.


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 5]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  It should be noted that newer systems are based natively on SMTP/MIME
  and do not suffer these limitations.  In particular, some systems may
  support media other than voice and fax.

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.  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 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 these directory listing capabilities
  are local matters.


















  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 6]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


3. Protocol Restrictions

  This protocol does not limit the number of recipients per message.
  Where possible, server 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.

  This protocol does not limit the maximum message length.
  Implementers 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 parameter is in bytes,
  not minutes or seconds.  The number of bytes varies by voice encoding
  format and includes 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 implementer is referred to the relevant RFCs for
  complete details. The table in Appendix A summarizes the protocol
  details of this profile.

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
  document are to be interpreted as described in [REQ].
























  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 7]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4. Voice Message Interchange Format

  The voice message interchange format is a profile of the Internet
  Mail Protocol Suite.  Any Internet Mail message containing the format
  defined in this section is referred to as a VPIM Message in this
  document.  As a result, this document assumes an understanding of the
  Internet Mail 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 and message
  disposition notifications [REPORT][DSN][DRPT][STATUS][MDN], and the
  electronic business card [MIMEDIR][VCARD].

  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 (denoted by the
  Content-Transfer-Encoding header field) 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, either
  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 (see section 5).  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 in a transfer encoding
  that cannot be rendered to the user, an appropriate negative delivery
  status notification MUST be sent.

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
  identification.










  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 8]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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:

     1) mailbox number
        - for use as a private numbering plan (any number of digits)
        - e.g.  2722@lucent.com

     2) mailbox number+extension
        - for use as a private numbering plan with extensions
          any number of digits, use of `+' as separator
        - e.g.  2722+111@Lucent.com

     3) +international number
        - for international telephone numbers conforming to E.164
          maximum of 15 digits
        - e.g.  +16137637582@vm.nortel.ca



  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                    [Page 9]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


     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.  +17035245550+230@ema.org

  Note that this address format is designed to be compatible with
  current usage within the voice messaging industry.  It is not
  compatible with the addressing formats of RFC s 2303-2304.  It is
  expected that as telephony services become more widespread on the
  Internet, these addressing formats will converge.

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:

  postmaster@domain

  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.

  non-mail-user@domain

  If a reply to a message is not possible, such as a telephone
  answering message, then the special address "non-mail-user" SHOULD 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 negative delivery status notification (DSN) for reply messages sent
  to the undeliverable address.  The status code for such NDN's is
  5.1.1 "Mailbox does not exist".

  Example:

               From: Telephone Answering <non-mail-user@mycompany.com>

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:


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 10]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


     Reply to the originator - (Address in the RFC822 Reply-to or From
                                field)
     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 "header fields"
  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 header fields. If all
  recipients cannot be presented then the recipient header fields
  SHOULD 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, header fields do not indicate delivery options for the
  transport of messages.

  Distribution list processors are noted for modifying or adding to the
  header fields of messages that pass through them.  VPIM systems MUST
  be able to accept and ignore header fields that are not defined here.

  The following header lines are permitted for use with VPIM voice
  messages:

4.2.1 From



  SEND RULES

  The originator's fully-qualified domain address (a mailbox address
  followed by the fully-qualified domain name) MUST be present. 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]

  Example:

               From: "Joe S. User" <12145551212@mycompany.com>

               From: Technical Support <611@serviceprovider.com>

               From: Non-mail-user@myserver.mycompany.com


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 11]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  Voice mail machines may not be able to support separate attributes
  for the "From:" and "Reply-To:" header fields, the SMTP MAIL FROM and
  the vCard email attribute, VPIM-conforming systems SHOULD set these
  values to the same address.  Use of addresses different than those
  present in the "From:" header field address may result in
  unanticipated behavior.

  RECEPTION RULES

  The user listed in this field should be presented in the voice
  message envelope of the voice messaging system as the originator of
  the message. The "From:" address SHOULD be used for replies (see
  4.8).  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 address.

4.2.2 To

  The "To:" field contains the recipient's fully-qualified domain
  address. Example:

               To: +12145551213@mycompany.com

  SEND RULES

  There MAY be one or more "To:" fields in any message. Systems SHOULD
  provide a list of recipients only if all recipients are available.

  Systems such as gateways from protocols which do not indicate the
  complete list of recipients SHOULD provide a "To:" line.  Because
  these systems cannot accurately enumerate all recipients in the "To:"
  headers, no recipients should be enumerated.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Systems compliant to this profile MAY discard the addresses in the
  "To:" fields if they are unable to store the information.  This
  would, of course, make a reply-to-all capability impossible.  If
  present, the addresses in the "To:" field MAY be used for a reply
  message to all recipients.

4.2.3 Cc

  The "Cc:" field 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 additional recipients.

  SEND RULES





  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 12]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  Conforming implementations MAY send "Cc:" lists if all recipients are
  known at the time or origination . The list of disclosed recipients
  MUST not include undisclosed recipients (ie., those sent via a blind
  copy). If not, systems SHOULD omit the "Cc:" fields to indicate that
  the full list of recipients is unknown or otherwise unavailable.

  Example:

               Cc: +12145551213@mycompany.com

  RECEPTION RULES

  Systems compliant to this profile MAY add all the addresses in the
  "Cc:" field to the "To:" field, others MAY discard the addresses in
  the "Cc:" fields.    If a list of "Cc:" addresses is present, these
  addresses MAY be used for a reply message to all recipients.

4.2.4 Date

  The "Date:" field MUST be present and contains the date, time, and
  time zone in which the message was sent by the originator.

  SEND RULES

  The time zone MUST be present and 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 [RFC822] date and time stamps into local time.

  If the VPIM sender is relaying a message from a system which does not
  provide a time stamp, the time of arrival at the gateway system
  SHOULD be used as the date.

  Example:

               Date: Wed, 28 Jul 96 10:08:49 -0800 (PST)

  RECEPTION RULES

  The sending system MUST report the time the message was sent. From
  [RFC822]

4.2.5 Sender

  SEND RULES

  The "Sender:" field 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. This header field MAY be sent by VPIM-conforming
  systems.



  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 13]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  RECEPTION RULES

  If the address in the "Sender:" field cannot be preserved in the
  recipient's message queues or in the next-hop protocol from a
  gateway, the field MAY be silently discarded.

4.2.6 Return-Path

  The "Return-path:" field 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). Any error messages
  resulting from the delivery failure MUST be sent to this address.
  Note that if the "Return-path:" is null ("<>"), e.g. no path, loop
  prevention or confidential, delivery status and message disposition
  notifications MUST NOT be sent.

  SEND RULES

  The originator system MUST not add this header.

  RECEPTION RULES

  If the receiving system is incapable of storing the return path to be
  used for subsequent delivery errors, the receiving system must
  otherwise ensure that further delivery errors don't happen. Systems
  that do not support the return path MUST ensure that at the time the
  message is acknowledged, the message is delivered to the recipient's
  ultimate mailbox.  Non-Delivery notifications should not be sent
  after that final delivery.



4.2.7 Message-id

  The "Message-Id:" field contains a unique per-message identifier.

  SEND RULES

  A unique message-id MUST be generated for each message sent from a
  VPIM-compliant implementation.

  Example:

               Message-Id: <12345678@mycompany.com>

  RECEPTION RULES

  The message id is not required to be stored on the receiving system.
  This identifier MAY be used for tracking, auditing, and returning
  receipt notification reports.  From [RFC822]




  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 14]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4.2.8 Reply-To

  If present, the "Reply-to:" header provides a preferred address to
  which reply messages should be sent (see 4.8).  Typically, voice mail
  systems can only support one originator of a message so it is likely
  that this field will be ignored by the receiving system. From
  [RFC822]

  SEND RULES

  A compliant system SHOULD NOT send a Reply-To header.

  RECEPTION RULES

   If a "reply-to:" field is present, a reply-to sender message MAY be
  sent to the address specified (that is, in lieu of the address in the
  "From:" field). If only one address of the originator is supported in
  the message store or in the next-hop protocol from a multi-protocol
  gateway, the address in the "From:" field MUST be used and the
  "Reply-To:" field MAY be silently discarded.

4.2.9 Received

  The "Received:" field contains trace information added to the
  beginning of a RFC 822 message by MTAs.  This is the only field
  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. From [RFC822]

  SEND RULES

  A VPIM-compliant system MUST add a "Received:" field. When acting as
  a gateway, information about the system translated from SHOULD be
  included.

  RECEPTION RULES

  A VPIM-compliant system SHOULD NOT remove any "Received:" fields when
  relaying messages to other  MTAs or gateways.  These header fields
  MAY be ignored or deleted when the message is received at the final
  destination.

4.2.10 MIME Version

  The "MIME-Version:" field indicates that the message conforms to
  [MIME]. Systems compliant with this specification SHOULD include a
  comment with the words "(Voice 2.0)". [VPIM1] defines an earlier
  version of this profile and uses the token (Voice 1.0).  Example:

               MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)




  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 15]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  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.  The allowable contents are detailed
  starting in section 4.4 of this document.  From [MIME2]

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".From [MIME1].

4.2.13 Sensitivity

  The "Sensitivity:" field, if present, indicates the requested privacy
  level.  The case-insensitive values "Personal", "Private", and
  "Normal" are specified. If no privacy is requested, this field is
  omitted.

  SEND RULES

  A VPIM-compliant implementations MAY include this header to indicate
  the sensitivity of a message. If the message is of "Normal"
  sensitivity, this field SHOULD be omitted. From: [X.400]

  RECEPTION RULES

   If a "Sensitivity:" field with a value of "Personal" or "Private" 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 responder 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
  responder.










  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 16]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  If the receiving system does not support privacy and the sensitivity
  is one of "Personal" or "Private", a negative delivery status
  notification MUST be sent to the originator with the appropriate
  status code (X.Y.Z) indicating that privacy could not be assured. The
  message contents SHOULD  be returned to the sender to allow for a
  voice context with the notification. A non-delivery notification to a
  private message SHOULD NOT be tagged private since it will be sent to
  the originator.  From: [X.400]

  A message with no privacy explicitly noted (ie., no header) or with
  _ Normal_  sensitivity has no special treatment.

4.2.14 Importance

  Indicates the requested importance 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 of the absent header assumed to be "normal".
  From: [X.400]

  SEND RULES

  Compliant implementations MAY include this header to indicate the
  importance of a message

  RECEPTION RULES

  If the receiving system does not support importance, the attribute
  may be silently dropped.  If the attribute is supported, it can be
  used for various user interface purposes including the ordering
  messages within a mailbox or trigging notification devices such as
  pagers.

4.2.15 Subject

  The subject field is often provided by email systems but is not
  widely supported on Voice Mail platforms. From [RFC822]

  SEND RULES

  For compatibility with text based mailbox interfaces, a text subject
  field SHOULD be generated by a compliant implementation. 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" or _ Voice Message_  for the benefit
  of GUI enabled recipients.

  RECEPTION RULES

  It is anticipated that many voice-only systems will be incapable of
  storing the subject line. The subject MAY be discarded if present by
  a receiving system.


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 17]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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

  Example:

               Disposition-notification-to: +12145551213@mycompany.com

  SEND RULES

  VPIM-compliant implementations MAY include this header to request a
  disposition indication such as a listen confirmation.

  RECEPTION RULES

  The presence of a "Disposition-notification-to:" header in a message
  is merely a request for an MDN described in 4.6.3.  The recipients'
  system is always free to silently ignore such a request so this
  header does not burden any system that does not support it.  From
  [MDN].

4.2.17 Disposition-Notification-Options

  This header MAY be present to define future extensions parameters for
  an MDN requested by the presence of the header in the previous
  section.

  SEND RULES

  No "Disposition-notification-options:" are defined that are useful
  for voice messaging.  Sending systems SHOULD NOT request disposition
  notification options by sending a disposition-notification-options
  header.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Currently no parameters are defined by this document or by [MDN].
  However for forward compatibility with future extensions, this header
  MUST be processed if present, if MDNs are supported.  If it contains
  a extension parameter that is required for proper MDN generation
  (noted with "=required"), then an MDN MUST NOT be sent if the
  parameter is not understood.  See [MDN] for complete details.

  Example:

               Disposition-notification-options:
                 whizzbang=required,foo



  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 18]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4.3 MIME Audio Content Descriptions

4.3.1 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-
     Disposition.

     Example:

               Content-Description: Big Telco Voice Message

4.3.2 Content-Disposition:

     This field MUST be present to allow the parsable identification of
     body parts within a VPIM voice message.  This is especially useful
     if, as is typical, more than one Audio/* 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 must always be of type inline.  However, it is still
     useful to include a filename value, so this should be present if
     this information is available.  From [DISP]

     In order to distinguish between the various types of audio contents
     in a VPIM voice message a new disposition parameter "voice" is
     defined with the parameter values below to be used as appropriate
     (see 18.2):

       Voice-Message - the primary voice message,
       Voice-Message-Notification - a spoken delivery notification
         or spoken disposition notification,
       Originator-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the originator,
       Recipient-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the recipient(s) if
         available to the originator
       Spoken-Subject- the spoken subject of the message, typically
         spoken by the originator

     Note that there SHOULD only be one instance of each of these types
     of audio contents per message level.  Additional instances of a
     given type (i.e., parameter value) may occur within an attached
     forwarded voice message.

     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).






  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 19]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4.3.3 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]

     Example:

               Content-Duration: 33

4.3.4 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

4.4 Voice Message Content Types

  The content types described in this section are identified for use
  within the multipart/voice-message content.  This content is referred
  to as a `VPIM voice message' in this document and is the fundamental
  part of a `VPIM message'.

  Only the contents profiled subsequently (and occasionally those in
  4.5) can be sent within a VPIM voice message construct (i.e., the
  mulitpart/voice-message content type) to form a simple or a more
  complex structure (several examples are given in Appendix B).  The
  presence of other contents (see 4.5) within a VPIM voice message is
  not permitted  If present, it MAY be tolerated, but most voice
  message  systems have no means to tolerate other contents.  In this
  case, the unsupported content MAY be deleted and the remaining
  message delivered, however most systems SHOULD reject the entire
  message with a negative delivery status notification. In case of
  partial delivery, the recipient must be notified of the deletion.
  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.

4.4.1 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.

  SEND RULES

  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 text/directory).  The most


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 20]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  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).

  RECEPTION RULES

  Conformant implementations MUST recognize the Multipart/Voice-Message
  content (whether it is a top level content or below a
  multipart/mixed) and be able to separate the contents (e.g. spoken
  name or spoken subject).

  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.

4.4.2 Message/RFC822

  SEND RULES

  MIME requires support of the Message/RFC822 message encapsulation
  body part.  This body part SHOULD be used within a multipart/voice-
  message to forward complete messages (see 4.7) or to reply with
  original content (see4.8). From [MIME2]

  RECEPTION RULES

  The receiving system SHOULD treat this attachment as a forwarded
  message. The receiving system may flatten the forwarding structure
  (ie., remove this construct to leave multiple voice contents or even
  concatenate the voice contents to fit in a recipient's mailbox) if
  necessary.  If flattening and vCards are supported, the recipient
  system MUST discard other vCards of forwarded parts such that only
  the outermost vCard is retained.

4.4.3 Text/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.

  SEND RULES

  Each vCard MUST be contained within a Text/Directory content type
  [MIMEDIR] within a VPIM message.  [MIMEDIR] requires that the
  character set MUST be defined as a parameter value (typically us-
  ascii for VPIM) and that the profile SHOULD be defined (the value
  MUST be vCard within VPIM messages).


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 21]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  Each VPIM message SHOULD be created with a Text/Directory (vCard
  profile) content type that MUST contain the preferred email address,
  telephone number, and text name of the message originator as well as
  the vCard version.  The vCard SHOULD contain the spoken name and role
  of the originator, as well as the revision date.  Any other vCard
  attribute MAY also be present.  The intent is that the vCard be used
  as the source of information to contact the originator (e.g., reply,
  call).

The vCard profile [VCARD] 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 an address that
               supports VPIM messages.  This address MAY be used for
               reply-to-sender functionality when the RFC822 FROM:
     header
               field is not accessible to the voice mail helper
               application.

     Version - Indicates the version of the vCard profile.  Version 3.0
               [VCARD] MUST be used.

  The following attributes SHOULD be specified:

     N   -   Family Name, Given Name, Additional Names, Honorific
             Prefixes, and Suffixes. Because it is expected that
             recipients using a telephone user interface will use the
             information in the vCard to identify the originator, and
             the GUI will see the information presented in the FROM
             line, all present components in the text name of the FROM
             header field MUST match the values provided by the Vcard.

     SOUND - spoken name sound data (various types, typically 32KADPCM)

     REV  -  Revision of vCard in ISO 8601 date format


  The vCard MAY use other attributes as defined in [VCARD] or
  extensions attributes not yet defined (e.g. recipient media
  capabilities).

  If present, the spoken name attribute MUST be denoted by a content ID
  pointing to an audio/* content elsewhere in the VPIM message.







  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 22]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  Each multipart/voice-message content MUST only contain one vCard --
  more than one is an error condition.  A VPIM message may contain
  forwarded messages.  VCards that are part of the forwarded messages
  are permitted. 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 top-level.

  RECEPTION RULES

  The vCard MAY be used by the receiving system. It provides a useful
  mechanism to transport information about the originator that can be
  used by the receiving VPIM system or other local applications. It may
  also be used to create a reply VPIM message (see 4.8).

  Example:


     Content-Type: text/directory; charset=us-ascii; profile=vCard
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

     BEGIN:VCARD
     N:Parsons;Glenn
     ORG:Northern Telecom
     TEL;TYPE=VOICE;MSG;WORK:+1-613-763-7582
     EMAIL;TYPE=INTERNET;glenn.parsons@nortel.ca
     EMAIL;TYPE=INTERNET;VPIM:6137637582@vm.nortel.ca
     SOUND;TYPE=32KADPCM;ENCODING=URI: CID:<part1@VM2-4321>
     REV:19960831T103310Z
     Version: 3.0
     END:VCARD


4.4.4 Audio/32KADPCM

  SEND RULES

  An implementation compliant to this profile MUST send Audio/32KADPCM
  by default for voice [ADPCM]. This encoding is a moderately
  compressed encoding with a data rate of 32 kbits/second using
  moderate processing resources. 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).

  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 4.4.3).

  RECEPTION RULES



  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 23]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  Receivers MUST be able to accept and decode Audio/32KADPCM. 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.

4.4.5 Image/Tiff

  A common image encoding for facsimile, known as TIFF-F, is a
  derivative of the Tag Image File Format (TIFF) and is described in
  several documents.  For the purposes of VPIM, the F Profile of TIFF
  for Facsimile (TIFF-F) is defined in [TIFF-F] and the image/tiff MIME
  content type is defined in [TIFFREG].  While there are several
  formats of TIFF, only TIFF-F is profiled for use within a VPIM voice
  message.  Further, since the TIFF-F file format is used in a store-
  and-forward mode with VPIM, the image MUST be encoded so that there
  is only one image strip per facsimile page.

  SEND RULES

  All VPIM implementations that support facsimile MUST generate TIFF-F
  compatible facsimile contents in the image/tiff; application=faxbw
  sub-type encoding by default.  An implementation SHOULD send this fax
  content in multipart/voice-message but may send it outside to be more
  compatible with fax only (RFC 2305) implementations.

  While any valid MIME body header MAY be used (e.g., Content-
  Disposition to indicate the filename), none are specified to have
  special semantics for VPIM and MAY be ignored.  Note that the content
  type parameter application=faxbw MUST be included in outbound
  messages.

  Inbound messages in the multipart/voice-message with or without the
  application parameter MUST be rendered to the user. If the rendering
  software encounters an error in the file format, some form of
  negative delivery status notification SHOULD be sent to the
  originator).

  RECEPTION RULES

  Not all VPIM systems support fax. Those that do MUST support it
  without the multipart/voice-message and MAY outside of the
  multipart/voice-message. A receiving system MAY accept the voice
  content of a VPIM message and discard the fax content.  The recipient
  MUST be notified of the dropped content.  Though discouraged, a
  recipient system MAY reject (with appropriate NDN) the entire message
  if it cannot handle fax attachments within the multipart/voice-
  message.






  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 24]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4.4.6 Proprietary Voice or Fax Formats

  Use of any other encoding except the required codecs reduces
  interoperability in the absence of explicit knowledge about the
  capabilities of the recipient. A compliant implementation MAY use any
  other encoding 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. The fax encodings should be
  registered as sub-types of Image.

  SEND RULES

  Proprietary voice encoding formats or other standard formats MAY be
  sent under this profile only if the sender has a reasonable
  expectation that the recipient will accept the encoding.  In
  practice, this requires explicit per-destination configuration
  information maintained either in a directory, personal address book,
  or gateway configuration tables.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Systems MAY accept other audio/* or image/* content types if they can
  decode them. Systems which receive audio/* or image/* content types
  which they are unable to decode MUST return the message to the
  originator with an NDN indicating media not supported.

4.5 Other MIME Content Types

  An implementation compliant with this profile MAY send additional
  contents in a VPIM message, but only outside the multipart/voice-
  message.  If an implementation receives a VPIM message  that contains
  content types not specified in 4.4 or 4.5, 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 (i.e., without a
  multipart/voice-message content type) with any of the contents
  defined in 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). Implementations MUST issue negative
  delivery status notifications to the originator when any form of non-
  delivery to the recipient occurs.

  Only the contents specified in 4.4 are required to be supported
  within a multipart/voice message by a receiving system.  Other
  contents MUST NOT be sent within the multipart/voice-message. The
  multipart contents defined below MAY be sent within a multipart/voice
  message as the recipient system will likely reject the message.
  Several examples are given in Appendix B.






  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 25]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4.5.1 Multipart/Mixed

  Multipart/mixed provides the facilities for enclosing several body
  parts in a single message.

  SEND RULES

  When used in a VPIM message, multipart/mixed is the top level content
  type and multipart/voice-message is typically the first second level
  content type.  Other attachments follow as additional second level
  content types. Multipart/mixed may also be used within a
  multipart/voice-message but caution is advised.  Note that the
  semantics of using complex hierarchy within a voice message is
  undefined and the use of such a structure is discouraged.

  Multipart/mixed contents MAY be sent as the top level of a VPIM
  message.  Typically, this would only be used when attaching non-voice
  or fax content to a VPIM message.  These other contents SHOULD be
  placed after the multipart/voice-message.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Compliant systems MUST accept multipart/mixed content types at the
  top level and SHOULD within a multipart/voice-messages.  Systems may
  collapse the contents of the multipart/mixed structure into the
  multipart/voice message itself.  If necessary, systems SHOULD discard
  the other contents to deliver the voice content but they MAY reject
  the entire message if this is not possible. From [MIME2]

4.5.2 Text/Plain

  MIME requires support of the basic Text/Plain content type.  This
  content type has limited applicability within the voice messaging
  environment.  However, because VPIM is a MIME profile, MIME
  requirements should be met.

  SEND RULES

  Compliant VPIM implementations SHOULD NOT send the Text/Plain
  content-type. It should be understood that the textual information is
  not considered a primary media within multipart/voice-message and may
  be discarded (or rejected) by a receiving system.

  RECEPTION RULES










  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 26]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  Within a multipart/voice message, the text/plain content type MAY be
  dropped from the message.  The recipient SHOULD NOT  reject the
  entire message (if an implementation does reject the entire message a
  suitable DSN MUST be used). However, if no rendering of the text is
  possible and no indication of its presence can be given to the
  recipient, the entire message SHOULD be returned to the sender with a
  negative delivery status notification and a media-unsupported status
  code.

  Outside a Multipart/Voice-message, 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 (once
  accepted) on voice messaging systems including text-to-speech and
  text-to-fax conversions.

4.6 Return and Notification Messages

  VPIM delivery status notification messages (4.6.2) 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 address in the Mail From (5.1.2) if available (same as
  the return path (4.2.6) if present), otherwise, the From (4.2.1)
  address may be used.

  VPIM Receipt Notification messages (4.6.3) SHOULD be sent to the
  sender specified in the Disposition-Notification-To header field
  (4.2.16).  The MDN SHOULD be sent after the message has been
  presented to the recipient or if the message has somehow been
  disposed of without being presented to the recipient (e.g. if it were
  deleted before playing it).

  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
  (4.6.1) and SHOULD contain a spoken error message.

4.6.1 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. The multipart/report content-type is
  used to deliver both delivery status reports indicating transport
  success or failure and message disposition notifications to indicate
  post-delivery events such as receipt notification.

  SEND RULES

  Compliant implementations MUST use the Multipart/Report construct.
  From [REPORT]



  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 27]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  Multipart/Report messages from VPIM implementations MAY include the
  human-readable description of the error as a spoken audio/* content
  (this speech MAY be made available to the notification recipient).
  As well, VPIM implementations MAY generate Multipart/Report messages
  that encode the human-readable description of the error as text.
  Note that per [DSN] the human-readable part MUST always be present.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Compliant implementations MUST recognize and decode the
  Multipart/Report content type and its components in order to present
  the report to the user.

  As well, implementers MUST be able to handle the human readable
  description of the error as text or audio.

4.6.2 Message/Delivery-status

  This MIME body part is used for sending machine-parsable delivery
  status notifications.

  SEND RULES

  Compliant implementations MUST use the Message/delivery-status
  construct when returning messages or sending warnings.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Compliant implementations MUST recognize and decode the
  Message/delivery-status content type and present the reason for
  failure to the sender of the message.  From [DSN]

4.6.3 Message/Disposition-notification

  This MIME body part is used for sending machine-parsable read-receipt
  message disposition notifications.

  SEND RULES

  Conforming implementations SHOULD use the Message/Disposition-
  notification construct when sending post-delivery message status
  notifications.  These MDNs, however, MUST only be sent in response to
  the presence of the Disposition-notification-to header described in
  4.2.16.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Conforming implementations should recognize and decode the
  Message/Disposition-notification content type and present the
  notification to the user. From [MDN]




  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 28]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4.7 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 multiple 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 header fields are not available for the forwarded
  content, simulated header fields 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", and "Content-Type" header fields. From [MIME2]

  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 audio content MAY be sent as a single
  Audio/* segment without including any forwarding semantics.

4.8 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. It is expected that within
  legacy email implementations, the voice message viewer application
  may need to create a reply message without the benefit of the RFC822
  headers.  In such a case, the vCard MAY be used to generate a reply
  to the sender.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Support of multiple originator header fields is often not possible on
  voice messaging systems, so it may be necessary to choose only one
  when gatewaying a VPIM message to another voice message system.
  However, implementers should note that this may make it impossible to
  send error messages and replies to their proper destinations.

  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).  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.


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 29]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


4.9 Notification Messages

  VPIM delivery status notification messages (4.6.2) 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 Mail From (5.1.2) if available (same as the return
  path (4.2.6) if present), otherwise, the From (4.2.1) address may be
  used.

  VPIM Receipt Notification messages (4.6.3) should be sent to the
  sender specified in the Disposition-Notification-To header field
  (4.2.16), only after the message has been presented to the recipient
  or if the message has somehow been disposed of without being
  presented to the recipient (e.g. if it were deleted before playing
  it).

  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
  (4.6.1) and SHOULD contain a spoken error message.

  If a VPIM system receives a message with contents that are not
  understood (see 4.4 & 4.5), its handling is a local matter.  A
  delivery status notification SHOULD be generated if the message could
  not be delivered because of unknown contents (e.g., on traditional
  voice processing systems).  In some cases, the message may be
  delivered (with a positive DSN sent) to a mailbox before the
  determination of rendering can be made.


























  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 30]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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 messaging  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
  profile.

5.1 ESMTP Commands

5.1.1 HELO

  Base SMTP greeting and identification of sender.

  SEND RULES

  This command SHOULD not be sent by compliant systems unless the more-
  capable EHLO command is not accepted.  It is included for
  compatibility with general SMTP implementations.

  RECEPTION RULES

  Compliant servers MUST implement the HELO command for backward
  compatibility. From [SMTP]

5.1.2 MAIL FROM

  Originating mailbox.  This address contains the mailbox to which
  errors should be sent.

  SEND RULES






  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 31]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  VPIM implementations SHOULD use the same address in the MAIL FROM
  command as is used in the From header field. This address is not
  necessarily 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. From [SMTP, ESMTP]

  RECEPTION RULES

  The MAIL FROM address SHOULD be stored in the local message store for
  the purposes of generating a delivery status notification to the
  originator. The address indicated in the MAIL FROM command SHOULD 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 delivery status notifications MUST be sent to the MAIL FROM
  address, the use of the null address ("<>") is often used to prevent
  looping of messages.  This null address MAY be used to note that a
  particular message has no return path (e.g. a telephone answer
  message).  From [SMTP]

5.1.3 RCPT TO

  Recipient's mailbox. The parameter to this command contains only the
  address to which the message should be delivered for this
  transaction.  It is the set of addresses in one or more RCPT TO
  commands that are used for mail routing. From [SMTP, ESMTP]

  Note: In the event that multiple transport connections to multiple
  destination machines are required for the same message, the set of
  addresses in a given transport connection may not match the list of
  recipients in the message header fields.

5.1.4 DATA

  Initiates the transfer of message data.  Support for this command is
  required.  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]


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 32]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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]

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 section 5.  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.

5.2.1 PIPELINING

  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 keyword.  From [PIPE]






  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 33]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


5.2.2 SIZE

  The "SIZE" keyword provides a mechanism by which the SMTP server can
  indicate the maximum size message supported.  Compliant servers MUST
  provide size extension to indicate the maximum size message that can
  be accepted.  Clients SHOULD NOT send messages larger than the size
  indicated by the server.  Clients SHOULD advertise SIZE= when sending
  messages to servers that indicate support for the SIZE extension.
  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 MAY support binary
  transport indicated by this capability.  From [BINARY]

5.2.4 BINARYMIME

  The "BINARYMIME" keyword indicates that the SMTP server can accept
  binary encoded MIME messages. Compliant implementations MAY support
  binary transport indicated by this capability.  Note that support for
  this feature requires support of CHUNKING.  From [BINARY]

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].

5.2.6 ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES

  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 notification format defined in [DSN]. Compliant
  implementations SHOULD support this capability.  From [STATUS]

5.3 ESMTP Parameters - MAIL FROM

5.3.1 BINARYMIME

  The current message is a binary encoded MIME messages.  Compliant
  implementations SHOULD support binary transport indicated by this
  parameter.  From [BINARY]







  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 34]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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
  [DRPT]

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]

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. Compliant implementations MAY use
  this parameter.  From [DRPT]

5.5 ESMTP - SMTP Downgrading

  The ESMTP extensions suggested or required for conformance to VPIM
  fall into two categories.  The first category includes features which
  increase the efficiency of the transport system such as SIZE,
  BINARYMIME, and PIPELINING.  In the event of a downgrade to a less
  functional transport system, these features can be dropped with no
  functional change to the sender or recipient.













  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 35]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  The second category of features is transport extensions in support of
  new functions.  DSN and EnhancedStatusCodes provide essential
  improvements in the handling of delivery status notifications to
  bring email to the level of reliability expected of Voice Mail.  To
  ensure a consistent level of service across an intranet or the global
  Internet, it is essential that VPIM compliant ESMTP support the ESMTP
  DSN extension at all hops between a VPIM originating system and the
  recipient system. In the situation where a `downgrade' is unavoidable
  a relay hop may be forced (by the next hop) to forward a VPIM message
  without the ESMTP request for positive delivery status notification.
  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 provide the fully-
  qualified domain name (FQDN) of the recipient 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 header fields 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.

7. 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.

7.1 Network Management

  The digital interface to the VM and the TCP/IP protocols MAY be
  managed.  MIB II MAY be implemented to provide basic statistics and
  reporting of TCP and IP protocol performance. [MIB II]







  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 36]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


8. Conformance Requirements

  VPIM is a messaging application which must be supported in several
  environments and be supported on differing devices.  These
  environments include traditional voice processing systems, desktop
  voice messaging systems, store and forward relays, and protocol
  translation gateways.

  In order to accommodate all environments, this document defines two
  areas of conformance:  transport and content.

  Transport conformant systems will pass VPIM messages in a store and
  forward manner with assured delivery notifications and without the
  loss of information.  It is expected that most store and forward
  Internet mail based messaging systems will be VPIM transport
  compliant.

  Content conformant systems will generate and interpret VPIM messages.
  Conformance in the generation of VPIM messages indicates that the
  restrictions of this profile are honored.  Only contents specified in
  this profile or extensions agreed to by bilateral agreement may be
  sent.  Conformance in the interpretation of VPIM messages indicates
  that all VPIM content types and constructs can be received;  that all
  mandatory VPIM content types can be decoded and presented to the
  recipient in an appropriate manner; and that any unrenderable
  contents result in the appropriate notification.

  A summary of the compliance requirements is contained in Appendix A.

  VPIM end systems are expected to be both transport and content
  conformant.  They should generate conforming content, reliably send
  it to the next hop system, receive a message, decode the message and
  present it to the user.  Voice messaging systems and protocol
  conversion gateways are considered end systems.

  Relay systems are expected to be transport compliant in order to
  receive and send conforming messages.  However, they must also create
  VPIM conforming delivery status notifications in the event of
  delivery problems.

  Desktop Email clients that support VPIM and are expected to be
  content conformant. Desktop email clients use various protocols and
  API's for exchanging messages with the local message store and
  message transport system.  While these clients may benefit from VPIM
  transport capabilities, specific client-server requirements are out-
  of-scope for this document.








  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 37]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


9. Security Considerations

9.1 General Directive

  This document is a profile of existing Internet mail protocols.  To
  maintain interoperability with Internet mail, any security to be
  provided should be part of the Internet security infrastructure,
  rather than a new mechanism or some other mechanism outside of the
  Internet infrastructure.

9.2 Threats and Problems

  Both Internet mail and voice messaging have their own set of threats
  and countermeasures.  As such, this specification does not create any
  security issues not already existing in the profiled Internet mail
  and voice mail protocols themselves.  This section attends only to
  the set of additional threats that ensue from integrating the two
  services.

9.2.1 Spoofed sender

  The actual sender of the voice message might not be the same as that
  specified in the Sender or From header fields of the message content
  header fields or the MAIL FROM address from the SMTP envelope.  In a
  tightly constrained environment, sufficient physical and software
  controls may be able to ensure prevention of this problem.  In
  addition, the recognition of the sender's voice may provide
  confidence of the sender's identity irrespective of that specified in
  Sender or From.  It should be recognized that SMTP implementations do
  not provide inherent authentication of the senders of messages, nor
  are sites under obligation to provide such authentication.

9.2.2 Unsolicited voice mail

  Assigning an Internet mail address to a voice mailbox opens the
  possibility of receiving unsolicited messages (either text or voice
  mail).  Traditionally voice mail systems operated in closed
  environments and were not susceptible to unknown senders.  Voice mail
  users have a higher expectation of mailbox privacy and may consider
  such messages as a security breach.  Many Internet mail systems are
  choosing to block all messages from unknown sources in an attempt to
  curb this problem.

9.2.3 Message disclosure

  Users of voice messaging systems have an expectation of a level of
  message privacy that is higher than the level provided by Internet
  mail without security enhancements.  This expectation of privacy by
  users SHOULD be preserved as much as possible.





  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 38]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


9.3 Security Techniques

  Sufficient physical and software control may be acceptable in
  constrained environments.  Further, the profile specified in this
  document does not in any way preclude the use of any Internet object
  or channel security protocol to encrypt, authenticate, or non-
  repudiate the messages.

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", RFC 2422, September 1998.

[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,
   01/15/1996.

[MIMEDIR] F. Dawson, T. Howes, & M. Smith, "A MIME Content-Type for
   Directory Information", RFC 2425 September 1998

[DISP] R. Troost and S. Dorner, Communicating Presentation Information
   in Internet Messages:  The Content-Disposition Header, RFC 2183,
   August 1997

[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", RFC 2424, September 1998.


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 39]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


[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.

[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" RFC 2298, March 1998

[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,
   01/15/1996.



  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 40]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


[REQ] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
   Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.

[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.

[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:
   Application F", RFC 2306 , March 1998.

[TIFFREG] G. Parsons, J. Rafferty & S. Zilles, "Tag Image File Format:
   image/tiff - MIME sub-type registraion", RFC 2302, March 1998.

[V-MSG] G. Vaudreuil and G. Parsons, "VPIM Voice Message:  MIME Sub-type
   Registration", RFC 2022, September 1998.

[VCARD] Dawson, Frank, Howes, Tim, "vCard MIME Directory Profile" RFC
   2426, September 1998.

[VPIM1] Vaudreuil, Greg, "Voice Profile for Internet Mail", RFC 1911,
   Feb 1996.

[VPIM2] Vaudreuil, Greg, Parsons, Glen, "Voice Profile for Internet
   Mail, Version 2", RFC 2421, September 1998.

[X.400] Hardcastle-Kille, S., "Mapping between X.400(1988) / ISO 10021
   and RFC 822", RFC 1327, May 1992.


















  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 41]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


11. Acknowledgments

  The authors would like to offer a special thanks to the Electronic
  Messaging Association (EMA), especially the members of the Voice
  Messaging Committee and the VPIM Work Group, for their support of the
  VPIM specification and the efforts they have made to ensure its
  success.

  The EMA hosts the VPIM web page at http://www.ema.org/vpim.

12. Copyright Notice

  "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.

  This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
  others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
  or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
  and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
  kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
  included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
  document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
  the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
  Internet organizations, except as needed for the  purpose of
  developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
  copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
  followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
  English.

  The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
  revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

  This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
  "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
  TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
  BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
  HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
  MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."

















  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 42]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999




13. Authors' Addresses

  Glenn W. Parsons
  Nortel Networks
  P.O. Box 3511, Station C
  Ottawa, ON  K1Y 4H7
  Canada
  Phone: +1-613-763-7582
  Fax: +1-613-763-4461
  Glenn.Parsons@NortelNetworks.com


  Gregory M. Vaudreuil
  Lucent Technologies
  7291 Williamson Rd
  Dallas, TX  75214
  United States
  Phone/Fax: +1-972-733-2722
  GregV@Lucent.Com

































  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 43]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


14. Appendix A - VPIM Requirements Summary

  The following table summarizes the profile of VPIM version 2 detailed
  in this document.  Since in many cases it is not possible to simplify
  the qualifications for supporting each feature this appendix is
  informative.  The reader is recommended to read the complete
  explanation of each feature in the referenced section.  The text in
  the previous sections shall be deemed authoritative if any item in
  this table is ambiguous.

  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 conformance 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


     Status - whether the feature is mandatory, optional, or prohibited.
     The key words used in this table are to be interpreted as described
     in [REQ], though the following list gives a quick overview of the
     different degrees of feature conformance:
          Must         - mandatory
          Should       - required in the absence of a compelling
                         need to omit.
          May          - optional
          Should not   - prohibited in the absence of a compelling
                         need.
          Must not     - prohibited

     Footnote - special comment about conformance for a particular
     feature
















  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 44]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


                        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|C| | |x| | |
      Disposition-notification-options       |4.2.17    |C| | |x| | |
      Other Headers                          |4.2       |C| | |x| | |
                                             |          | | | | | | |











  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 45]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


                                                        | | | | |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|C| | |x| | |
      Disposition-notification-options       |4.2.17    |C| | | |x| |
      Other Headers                          |4.2       |C|x| | | | |3
                                             |          | | | | | | |
  Message Content Encoding:                  |          | | | | | | |
    Encoding outbound audio/fax contents     |          | | | | | | |
      7BIT                                   |4|C| | | | |x|
      8BIT                                   |4|C| | | | |x|
      Quoted Printable                       |4|C| | | | |x|
      Base64                                 |4|C|x| | | | |4
      Binary                                 |4|C| |x| | | |5
    Detection & decoding inbound messages    |          | | | | | | |
      7BIT                                   |4|C|x| | | | |
      8BIT                                   |4|C|x| | | | |
      Quoted Printable                       |4|C|x| | | | |
      Base64                                 |4|C|x| | | | |
      Binary                                 |4|C|x| | | | |5
                                             |          | | | | | | |







  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 46]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


                                                        | | | | |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                |4.4.1     |C|x| | | | |
        Message/RFC822                       |4.4.2     |C| | |x| | |
        Text/Directory                       |4.4.3     |C| |x| | | |
          include TEL, EMAIL, VERSION        |4.4.3     |C|x| | | | |
          include SOUND, N, REV              |4.4.3     |C| |x| | | |
          only one voice type per level      |4.4.3     |C|x| | | | |
        Audio/32KADPCM                       |4.4.4     |C|x| | | | |
          Content-Description                |4.3.1     |C| | |x| | |
          Content-Disposition                |4.3.2     |C|x| | | | |
          Content-Duration                   |4.3.3     |C| | |x| | |
          Content-Language                   |4.3.4     |C| | |x| | |
        Image/tiff; application=faxbw        |4.4.5|C| | |x| | |
        Audio/* or Image/* (other encodings) |4.4.6|C| | |x| | |
        Other contents                       |4.5       |C| | | | |x|
      Multipart/Mixed                        |4.5.1     |C| | |x| | |
      Text/plain                             |4.5.2     |C| | | |x| |
      Multipart/Report                       |4.6.1     |C|x| | | | |
         human-readable part is voice        |4.6.1     |C| |x| | | |
         human-readable part is text         |4.6.1     |C| | |x| | |
      Message/delivery-status                |4.6.2     |C|x| | | | |
      Message/disposition-notification       |4.6.3     |C| |x| | | |
      Other contents                         |4.5       |C| | |x| | |6
                                             |          | | | | | | |
    Detection & decoding in inbound messages |          | | | | | | |
      Multipart/Voice-Message                |4.4.1     |C|x| | | | |
        Message/RFC822                       |4.4.2     |C|x| | | | |
        Text/Directory                       |4.4.3     |C| |x| | | |
          recognize TEL, EMAIL, VERSION      |4.4.3     |C|x| | | | |
          recognize SOUND, N, REV            |4.4.3     |C| |x| | | |
        Audio/32KADPCM                       |4.4.4     |C|x| | | | |
          Content-Description                |4.3.1     |C| | |x| | |
          Content-Disposition                |4.3.2     |C| |x| | | |
          Content-Duration                   |4.3.3     |C| | |x| | |
          Content-Langauge                   |4.3.4     |C| | |x| | |
        Image/tiff; application=faxbw        |4.4.5|C| |x| | | |
          send NDN if unable to render       |4.4.5|C|| |x | | |7
        Audio/* or Image/* (other encodings) |4.4.6|C| | |x| | |
        Other contents                       |4.5       |C| | | |x| |
      Multipart/Mixed                        |4.5.1     |C|x| | | | |


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 47]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


      Text/plain                             |4.5.2     |C|x| | | | |
        send NDN if unable to render         |4.5.2     |C|x| | | | |




















































  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 48]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


                                            |           | | | | |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
  ------------------------------------------|-----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|-
                                            |           | | | | | | |
     Multipart/Report                       |4.6.1      |C|x| | | | |
       human-readable part is voice         |4.6.1      |C| |x| | | |
       human-readable part is text          |4.6.1      |C|x| | | | |
      Message/delivery-status               |4.6.2      |C|x| | | | |
      Message/disposition-notification      |4.6.3      |C| |x| | | |
     Other contents                         |4.5        |C| | |x| | |6
        send NDN if unable to render        |4.5        |C| |x| | | |
                                            |           | | | | | | |
    Forwarded Messages                      |           | | | | | | |
      use Message/RFC822 construct          |4.7        |C| |x| | | |
      simulate headers if none available    |4.7        |C| |x| | | |
                                            |           | | | | | | |
    Reply Messages                          |           | | | | | | |
      send to Reply-to, else From address   |4.8        |C|x| | | | |
      send to non-mail-user                 |4.8        |C| | | |x| |
                                            |           | | | | | | |
    Notifications                           |           | | | | | | |
      use multipart/report format           |4.9        |C|x| | | | |
      always send error on non-delivery     |4.9        |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









  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 49]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


                                                        | | | | |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 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      |T|x| | | | |
      ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES                   |5.2.6      |T| |x| | | |
      RET                                   |5.3.2      |T| |x| | | |
      ENVID                                 |5.3.3      |T| | |x| | |
      NOTIFY                                |5.4.1      |T|x| | | | |
      ORCPT                                 |5.4.2      |T| | |x| | |
                                            |           | | | | | | |
    ESMTP-SMTP Downgrading                   |          | | | | | | |
      send delivery report upon downgrade    |5.5       |T|x| | | | |
                                             |          | | | | | | |
  Directory Address Resolution               |          | | | | | | |
    provide facility to resolve addresses    |6         |C| |x| | | |
    use vCards to populate local directory   |6         |C| |x| | | |8
    use headers to populate local directory  |6         |C| | | |x| |
                                             |          | | | | | | |
  Management Protocols:                      |          | | | | | | |
    Network management                       |7.1       |T| | |x| | |
  -------------------------------------------|----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|-


  Footnotes:

  1.  SHOULD leave blank 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 additional header fields 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
      agreement.




  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 50]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


  7.  If the content cannot be presented or acknowledged in some form,
      the entire message MUST be returned with a negative delivery
      status notification.
  8.  When the vCard is present in a message


















































  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 51]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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.

  To: +19725551212@vm1.mycompany.com
  To: +16135551234@VM1.mycompany.com
  From: "Parsons, Glenn" <12145551234@VM2.mycompany.com>
  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;
    Boundary="MessageBoundary"
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
  Message-ID: 123456789@VM2.mycompany.com
  Sensitivity: Private
  Importance: High

  --MessageBoundary
   Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
  Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name
  Content-Language: en-US
  Content-ID: part1@VM2-4321

  glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd
  (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data)
  fgdhgddlkgpokpeowrit09==

  --MessageBoundary
  Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
  Content-Description: Brand X Voice Message
  Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message; filename=msg1.726
  Content-Duration: 25

  iIiIiIjMzN3czdze3s7d7fwfHhcvESJVe/4yEhLz8/FOQjVFRERCESL/zqrq
  (This is a sample of the base64 message data) zb8tFdLTQt1PXj
  u7wjOyRhws+krdns7Rju0t4tLF7cE0K0MxOTOnRW/Pn30c8uHi9==

  --MessageBoundary
  Content-type: text/directory; charset=us-ascii; profile=vCard
  Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

  BEGIN:VCARD
  N:Parsons;Glenn;;Mr.;
  EMAIL;TYPE=INTERNET:+12145551234@VM2.mycompany.com
  TEL:+1-217-555-1234
  SOUND;TYPE=32KADPCM;ENCODING=URI: CID:<part1@VM2-4321>
  REV:19951031T222710Z
  VERSION: 3.0
  END:VCARD


  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 52]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999



  --MessageBoundary_

  The following message is a forwarded single segment voice.  Both the
  forwarded message and the forwarding message contain VCARDs with
  spoken names.

     To: +12145551212@vm1.mycompany.com
     From: "Vaudreuil, Greg" <+19725552345@VM2.mycompany.com>
     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;
       Boundary="MessageBoundary"
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
     Message-ID: ABCD-123456789@VM2.mycompany.com

     --MessageBoundary
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name
     Content-Language: en-US
     Content-ID: part3@VM2-4321

     glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd
     (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data)
     fgdhgd dlkgpokpeowrit09==

     --MessageBoundary
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Description: Forwarded Message Annotation
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64

     glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd
     (This is the voiced introductory remarks encoded in base64)
     jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gQ5tkjpokfgW
     dlkgpokpeowrit09==

     --MessageBoundary
     Content-type: Message/RFC822
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

     To: +19725552345@VM2.mycompany.com
     From: "Parsons, Glenn, W." <+16135551234@VM1.mycompany.com>
     Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 8:23:10 -0500 (EST)
     Content-type: Multipart/Voice-Message; Version=2.0;
       Boundary="MessageBoundary2"
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
     MIME-Version: 1.0  (Voice 2.0)





  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 53]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


     --MessageBoundary2
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name
     Content-Language: en-US
     Content-ID: part6@VM2-4321

     glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd
     (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data) fgdhgd
      dlkgpokpeowrit09==

     --MessageBoundary2
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64

     glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd
     (This is the original message audio data) fgwersdfmniwrjj
     jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gQ5tkjpokfgW
     dlkgpokpeowrit09==

     --MessageBoundary2
     Content-type: text/directory; charset=us-ascii
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

     BEGIN:VCARD
     N:Parsons;Glenn;W;Mr.;
     EMAIL;TYPE=INTERNET:+16135551234@VM2.mycompany.com
     TEL:+1-613-555-1234
     SOUND;TYPE=32KADPCM;ENCODING=URI: CID:<part6@VM2-4321>
     REV:19951031T222710Z
     END:VCARD

     --MessageBoundary2--

     --MessageBoundary
     Content-type: text/directory; charset=us-ascii
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

     BEGIN:VCARD
     N:Vaudreuil;Greg;;Mr.;
     SOUND;TYPE=32KADPCM;ENCODING=URI: CID:<part3@VM2-4321>
     EMAIL;TYPE=INTERNET,VPIM:+19725552345@VM2.mycompany.com
     TEL:+1-972-555-2345
     REV:19951031T222710Z
     VERSION: 3.0
     END:VCARD

     --MessageBoundary--





  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 54]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


     The following example is for a message returned to the sender by a
     VPIM gateway at VM1.company.com for a mailbox which does not exist.

     Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 17:16:05 -0400
     From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@vm.company.com>
     Message-Id: <199407072116.RAA14128@vm1.company.com>
     Subject: Returned voice message
     To: 2175552345@VM2.mycompany.com
     MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)
     Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status;
       boundary="RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM"

     --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Description: Spoken Delivery Status Notification
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice= Voice-Message-Notification
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64

     glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadadffsssddasdasd
     (This is a voiced description of the error in base64)
     jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gdffkjpokfgW
     dlkgpokpeowrit09==

     --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM
     Content-type: message/delivery-status

     Reporting-MTA: dns; vm1.company.com

     Original-Recipient: rfc822; 2145551234@VM1.mycompany.com
     Final-Recipient: rfc822; 2145551234@VM1.mycompany.com
     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

     --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM
     content-type: message/rfc822

     [original VPIM message goes here]

     --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM--













  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 55]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


     The following example is for a receipt notification sent to the
     original sender for a message which has been played.  This
     delivered VPIM message was received by a corporate gateway and
     relayed to a unified mailbox.

     Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 17:16:05 -0400
     From: "Greg Vaudreuil" <22722@vm.company.com>
     Message-Id: <199407072116.RAA14128@exchange.company.com>
     Subject: Voice message played
     To: 2175552345@VM2.mycompany.com
     MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)
     Content-Type: multipart/report;
       Report-type=disposition-notification;
       Boundary="RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM"

     --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM
     Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM
     Content-Description: Spoken Disposition Notification
     Content-Disposition: inline; voice= Voice-Message-Notification
     Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64

     glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadadffsssddasdasd
     (Voiced description of the disposition action in base64)
     jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gdffkjpokfgW
     dlkgpokpeowrit09==

     --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM
     Content-type: message/disposition-notification

     Reporting-UA: gregs-laptop.dallas.company.com (Unified FooMail 3.0)

     Original-Recipient: rfc822;22722@vm.company.com
     Final-Recipient: rfc822;Greg.Vaudreuil@foomail.company.com
     Original-Message-ID: <199509192301.12345@vm2.mycompany.com >
     Disposition: manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically; displayed

     --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM
     Content-type: message/rfc822

     [original VPIM message goes here]

     --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM--












  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 56]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


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
      ring-no-answer

      Remote system did not answer    5.5.5 Permanent protocol error
      AMIS-Analog handshake ("D" in         - wrong version
      response to "C" at connect
      time)

      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 4/28/00                   [Page 57]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


17. Appendix D - Example Voice Processing Disposition Types

  The following common voice processing disposition conditions and
  their corresponding MDN Disposition (which contains the disposition
  mode, type and modifier, if applicable) are given as examples.
  Implementers should refer to [MDN] for a full description of the
  format of message disposition notifications.

  Notification event               MDN Disposition mode, type &
  modifier
  ------------------------------   ------------------------------------
  -

  Message played by recipient,    manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically;
  receipt automatically returned  displayed

  Message deleted from mailbox    manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically;
  by user without listening       deleted

  Message cleared when mailbox    manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically;
  deleted by admin                deleted/mailbox-terminated

  Message automatically deleted   automatic-action/
  when older than administrator   MDN-sent-automatically; deleted/
  set threshold                   expired

  Message processed, however      manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically;
  audio encoding unknown -        processed/error
  unable to play to user          Error: unknown audio encoding

























  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 58]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


18. Appendix E - IANA Registrations

18.1 vCard EMAIL Type Definition for VPIM


   To: ietf-mime-directory@imc.org

   Subject: Registration of new parameter for text/directory MIME type
   EMAIL

   Type name: EMAIL

   Type purpose: To specify the electronic mail address for
   communication with the object the vCard represents (defined in
   [VCARD]).

   Type encoding: 8bit

   Type value: A single text value.

   Type special notes: The type may include the type parameter "TYPE" to
   specify the format or preference of the electronic mail address. The
   TYPE parameter values previously defined include: "internet" to
   indicate an Internet addressing type, "x400" to indicate a X.400
   addressing type and "pref" to indicate a preferred-use email address
   when more than one is specified. The value of "vpim" is defined to
   indicate that the address specified supports VPIM messages.  Other
   IANA registered address type may also be specified. The default email
   type is "internet". A non-standard value may also be specified.

   Type example:
               EMAIL;TYPE=internet,vpim:jqpublic@xyz.dom1.com

18.2 Voice Content-Disposition Parameter Definition

  To: IANA@IANA.ORG

  Subject: Registration of new Content-Disposition parameter



  Content-Disposition parameter name: voice

  Allowable values for this parameter:










  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 59]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


       Voice-Message - the primary voice message,
       Voice-Message-Notification - a spoken delivery notification
         or spoken disposition 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
         recipient,
       Spoken-Subject- the spoken subject of the message, typically
         spoken by the originator

  Description:

  In order to distinguish between the various types of audio contents
  in a VPIM voice message a new disposition parameter "voice" is
  defined with the preceding values to be used as appropriate. Note
  that there SHOULD only be one instance of each of these types of
  audio contents per message level.  Additional instances of a given
  type (i.e., parameter value) may occur within an attached forwarded
  voice message.



































  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 60]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


19. Appendix F - Change History: RFC 2421 (VPIM V2) to this Document

  The updated profile in this document is based on the implementation
  and operational deployment experience of several vendors.  The
  changes are categorized as general, content, transport and
  compliance.  They are summarized below:

  1. General

     - Various editorial updates to improve readability.

     - Separated send rules from reception rules.

     Clarified the behavior upon reception of unrecognized content types
     (eg. originator and recipient should be notified) expected with the
     interworking between voice and unified messaging systems.

     - added _ Normal_  sensitivity for consistency

     - should not use MDN Content-Disp options

     - reorganized the content type descriptions

  2. Content

     -      Changed handling of received lines by a gateway to SHOULD
       NOT delete in a gateway.  In gateways to systems such as AMIS,
       it is not possible to preserve this information.  It is intended
       that such systems be able to claim conformance.

     -      Removed "ROLE" as a recommended vCard field

     -      Proposed change of the encoding of spoken name in vCards
       from "by-reference" to "inline" will aid "helper application"
       based implementations create replies when access to RFC822
       headers is not possible.

  3. Transport

     - None

  4. Compliance

     - Aligned the table of Appendix A to the requirements in the text.



  Outstanding Issues

  Should functionality be dropped to progress to Draft Standard since
  some features are only Proposed Standard



  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 61]


  Internet Draft               VPIM v2                October 28, 1999


     -      v-Card

     -      DSN

     -      MDN

















































  Vaudreuil, Parsons       Expires 4/28/00                   [Page 62]