INTERNET-DRAFT Mark Day
Expires February 23, 2000 Lotus
Jonathan Rosenberg
Bell Labs
Hiroyasu Sugano
Fujitsu
A Model for Presence and Instant Messaging
draft-ietf-impp-model-02.txt
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all
provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
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 draft documents 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 "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.
This document and related documents are discussed on the impp mailing
list. To join the list, send mail to impp-request@iastate.edu. To
contribute to the discussion, send mail to impp@iastate.edu. The
archives are at http://lists.fsck.com/cgi-bin/wilma/pip. The IMPP
working group charter, including the current list of group documents,
can be found at http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/impp-charter.html.
1. Abstract
This document defines an abstract model for a presence and instant
messaging system. It defines the various entities involved, defines
terminology, and outlines the services provided by the system. The
goal is to provide a common vocabulary for further work on
requirements for protocols and markup for presence and instant
messaging.
2. Introduction
A presence and instant messaging system allows users to subscribe to
each other and be notified of changes in state, and for users to send
each other short instant messages. A number of requirements and
protocols have been proposed to support it [WHODP, ENVY, PRESENCE,
RVP-ADDR, RPIM, SIP-PIP, PIPR, RVP]. To facilitate development of a
suite of protocols to provide this service, we believe that it is
valuable to first develop a model for the system. The model consists
of the various entities involved, descriptions of the basic functions
they provide, and most importantly, definition of a vocabulary which
can be used to facilitate discussion.
We note that the purpose of this model is to be descriptive and
universal: we want the model to map reasonably onto all of the systems
that are informally described as presence or instant messaging
systems. The model is not intended to be prescriptive or achieve
interoperability: an element that appears in the model will not
necessarily be an element of an interoperable protocol, and may not
even be a good idea.
In this document, each element of the model appears in upper case
(e.g., PRESENCE SERVICE). No term in lower case or mixed case is
intended to be a term of the model.
The first part of this document is intended as an overview of the
model. The overview includes diagrams, and terms are presented in an
order that is intended to help the reader understand the relationship
between elements. The second part of the document is the actual
definition of the model, with terms presented in alphabetical order
for ease of reference.
The overview is intended to be helpful but is not definitive; it may
contain inadvertent differences from the definitions in the model. For
any such difference, the definition(s) in the model are taken to be
correct, rather than the explanation(s) in the overview.
3. Overview
The model is intended to provide a means for understanding, comparing,
and describing systems that support the services typically referred to
as presence and instant messaging. It consists of a number of named
entities that appear, in some form, in existing systems. No actual
implementation is likely to have every entity of the model as a
distinct part. Instead, there will almost always be parts of the
implementation that embody two or more entities of the model. However,
different implementations may combine entities in different ways.
The model defines two services: a PRESENCE SERVICE and an INSTANT
MESSAGE SERVICE. The PRESENCE SERVICE serves to accept information,
store it, and distribute it. The information stored is
(unsurprisingly) PRESENCE INFORMATION. The INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE
serves to accept and deliver INSTANT MESSAGES to INSTANT
INBOXES.
3.1 PRESENCE SERVICE
The PRESENCE SERVICE has two distinct sets of "clients" (remember,
these may be combined in an implementation, but treated separately in
the model). One set of clients, called PRESENTITIES, provides
PRESENCE INFORMATION to be stored and distributed. The other set of
clients, called WATCHERS, receives PRESENCE INFORMATION from the
service.
+---------------------------+
| PRESENCE SERVICE |
| |
+---------------------------+
^ |
| |
| v
+------------+ +------------+
| PRESENTITY | | WATCHER |
+------------+ +------------+
Fig. 1: Overview of Presence Service
There are two kinds of WATCHERS, called FETCHERS and SUBSCRIBERS. A
FETCHER simply requests the current value of some PRESENTITY's
PRESENCE INFORMATION from the PRESENCE SERVICE. In contrast, a
SUBSCRIBER requests notification from the PRESENCE SERVICE of (future)
changes in some PRESENTITY's PRESENCE INFORMATION. A special kind of
FETCHER is one that fetches information on a regular basis. This is
called a POLLER.
+----------------WATCHER---------------+
| |
| +----FETCHER---+ +--SUBSCRIBER--+ |
| | | | | |
| | +--POLLER--+ | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | +----------+ | | | |
| +--------------+ +--------------+ |
+--------------------------------------+
Fig. 2: Varieties of WATCHER
The PRESENCE SERVICE also has WATCHER INFORMATION about WATCHERS and
their activities in terms of fetching or subscribing to PRESENCE
INFORMATION. The PRESENCE SERVICE may also distribute WATCHER
INFORMATION to some WATCHERS, using the same mechanisms that are
available for distributing PRESENCE INFORMATION.
Changes to PRESENCE INFORMATION are distributed to SUBSCRIBERS via
NOTIFICATIONS. Figures 3a through 3c show the flow of information as a
piece of PRESENCE INFORMATION is changed from P1 to P2.
+---------------------------+
| PRESENCE SERVICE |
| P1 |
+---------------------------+
+------------+ +------------+
| P1->P2 | | P1 |
| PRESENTITY | | SUBSCRIBER |
+------------+ +------------+
Fig. 3a: NOTIFICATION (Step 1)
+---------------------------+
| PRESENCE SERVICE |
| P1->P2 |
+---------------------------+
^
|P2
+------------+ +------------+
| P2 | | P1 |
| PRESENTITY | | SUBSCRIBER |
+------------+ +------------+
Fig. 3b: NOTIFICATION (Step 2)
+---------------------------+
| PRESENCE SERVICE |
| P2 |
+---------------------------+
|P2
v
+------------+ +------------+
| P2 | | P1->P2 |
| PRESENTITY | | SUBSCRIBER |
+------------+ +------------+
Fig. 3c: NOTIFICATION (Step 3)
3.2 INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE
The INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE also has two distinct sets of "clients":
SENDERS and INSTANT INBOXES. A SENDER provides INSTANT MESSAGES to the
INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE for delivery. Each INSTANT MESSAGE is
addressed to a particular INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS, and the INSTANT
MESSAGE SERVICE attempts to deliver the message to a corresponding
INSTANT INBOX.
+---------------------------+
| INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE |
| |
+---------------------------+
^ |
| |
| v
+------------+ +---------------+
| SENDER | | INSTANT INBOX |
+------------+ +---------------+
Fig. 4: Overview of Instant Message Service
3.3 Protocols
A PRESENCE PROTOCOL defines the interaction between PRESENCE SERVICE,
PRESENTITIES, and WATCHERS. PRESENCE INFORMATION is carried by the
PRESENCE PROTOCOL.
An INSTANT MESSAGE PROTOCOL defines the interaction between INSTANT
MESSAGE SERVICE, SENDERS, and INSTANT INBOXES. INSTANT MESSAGES are
carried by the INSTANT MESSAGE PROTOCOL.
In terms of this model, we believe that the IMPP working
group is planning to develop detailed requirements and specifications
for the structure and formats of the PRESENCE PROTOCOL, PRESENCE
INFORMATION, INSTANT MESSAGE PROTOCOL, and INSTANT MESSAGES.
3.4 Formats
The model defines the PRESENCE INFORMATION to consist of an arbitrary
number of elements, called PRESENCE TUPLES. Each such element consists
of a STATUS marker (which might convey information such as
online/offline/busy/away/do not disturb), an optional COMMUNICATION
ADDRESS, and optional OTHER PRESENCE MARKUP. A COMMUNICATION ADDRESS
includes a COMMUNICATION MEANS and a CONTACT ADDRESS. One type of
COMMUNICATION MEANS, and the only one defined by this model, is
INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE. One type of CONTACT ADDRESS, and the only
one defined by this model, is INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS. However, other
possibilities exist: a COMMUNICATION MEANS might indicate some form of
telephony, for example, with the corresponding CONTACT ADDRESS
containing a telephone number.
+--------------------------------+
| PRESENCE INFORMATION |
+--------------------------------+
| +--------------------------+
=>| PRESENCE TUPLE |
| +--------------------------+
| | +-------------------+
| =>| CONTACT ADDRESS |
| | +-------------------+
| | +-------------------+
| =>| STATUS |
| | +-------------------+
| | +-------------------+
| =>| OTHER MARKUP |
| +-------------------+
| +--------------------------+
=>| PRESENCE TUPLE |
| +--------------------------+
| | +-------------------+
| =>| CONTACT ADDRESS |
| | +-------------------+
| | +-------------------+
| =>| STATUS |
| | +-------------------+
| | +-------------------+
| =>| OTHER MARKUP |
| +-------------------+
| +--------------------------+
=>| PRESENCE TUPLE |
+--------------------------+
| +-------------------+
=>| CONTACT ADDRESS |
| +-------------------+
| +-------------------+
=>| STATUS |
| +-------------------+
| +-------------------+
=>| OTHER MARKUP |
+-------------------+
Fig. 5: The structure of PRESENCE INFORMATION
STATUS is further defined by the model to have at least two states
that interact with INSTANT MESSAGE delivery -- OPEN, in which INSTANT
MESSAGES will be accepted, and CLOSED, in which INSTANT MESSAGES will
not be accepted. OPEN and CLOSED may also be applicable to other
COMMUNICATION MEANS -- OPEN mapping to some state meaning "available"
or "open for business" while CLOSED means "unavailable" or "closed to
business." The model allows STATUS to include other values, which may
be interpretable by programs or only by persons. The model also
allows STATUS to consist of single or multiple values.
3.5 Presence and its effect on Instant Messages
An INSTANT INBOX is a receptacle for INSTANT MESSAGES. Its INSTANT
INBOX ADDRESS is the information that can be included in PRESENCE
INFORMATION to define how an INSTANT MESSAGE should be delivered to
that INSTANT INBOX. As noted above, certain values of the STATUS
marker indicate whether INSTANT MESSAGES will be accepted at the
INSTANT INBOX. The model does not otherwise constrain the delivery
mechanism or format for instant messages. Reasonable people can
disagree about whether this omission is a strength or a weakness of
this model.
3.6 PRINCIPALS and their agents
This model includes other elements that are useful in characterizing
how the protocol and markup work. PRINCIPALS are the people, groups,
and/or software in the "real world" outside the system that use the
system as a means of coordination and communication. It is entirely
outside the model how the real world maps onto PRINCIPALS -- the
system of model entities knows only that two distinct PRINCIPALS are
distinct, and two identical PRINCIPALS are identical.
A PRINCIPAL interacts with the system via one of several user agents
(INBOX USER AGENT; SENDER USER AGENT; PRESENCE USER AGENT; WATCHER
USER AGENT). As usual, the different kinds of user agents are split
apart in this model even though most implementations will combine at
least some of them. A user agent is purely coupling between a
PRINCIPAL and some core entity of the system (respectively, INSTANT
INBOX; SENDER; PRESENTITY; WATCHER).
+---------------------------+
| PRESENCE SERVICE |
+---------------------------+
^ |
| PRESENCE PROTOCOL |
| v
+------------+ +------------+
| PRESENTITY | | WATCHER |
+------------+ +------------+
^ ^
| |
| |
o +--------------+ +-------------+ o
/|\ -->| PRESENCE UA | | WATCHER UA |<-- /|\
X +--------------+ +-------------+ X
(PRINCIPAL) (PRINCIPAL)
Fig. 6: A presence system
+---------------------------+
| INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE |
+---------------------------+
^ |
IM| INSTANT MESSAGE |IM
| PROTOCOL v
+------------+ +---------------+
| SENDER | | INSTANT INBOX |
+------------+ +---------------+
^ ^
| |
| |
o +-------------+ +------------------+ o
/|\ -->| SENDER UA | | INSTANT INBOX UA |<-- /|\
X +-------------+ +------------------+ X
(PRINCIPAL) (PRINCIPAL)
Fig. 7: An instant messaging system
3.7 Examples
A simple example of applying the model is to describe a generic "buddy
list" application. These applications typically expose the user's
presence to others, and make it possible to see the presence of
others. So we could describe a buddy list as the combination of a
PRESENCE USER AGENT and WATCHER USER AGENT for a single PRINCIPAL,
using a single PRESENTITY and a single SUBSCRIBER.
We could then extend our example to instant messaging and describe a
generic "instant messenger" as essentially a buddy list with
additional capabilities for sending and receiving instant messages. So
an instant messenger would be the combination of a PRESENCE USER
AGENT, WATCHER USER AGENT, INBOX USER AGENT, and SENDER USER
AGENT for a single PRINCIPAL, using a single PRESENTITY, single
SUBSCRIBER, and single INSTANT INBOX, with the PRESENTITY's PRESENCE
INFORMATION including an INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS that leads to the
INSTANT INBOX.
4. Model
ACCESS RULES: constraints on how a PRESENCE SERVICE makes PRESENCE
INFORMATION available to WATCHERS. For each PRESENTITY's PRESENCE
INFORMATION, the applicable ACCESS RULES are manipulated by the
PRESENCE USER AGENT of a PRINCIPAL that controls the PRESENTITY.
Motivation: We need some way of talking about hiding presence
information from people.
CLOSED: a distinguished value of the STATUS marker. In the context of
INSTANT MESSAGES, this value means that the associated INSTANT INBOX
ADDRESS, if any, corresponds to an INSTANT INBOX that is unable to
accept an INSTANT MESSAGE. This value may have an analogous meaning
for other COMMUNICATION MEANS, but any such meaning is not defined by
this model. Contrast with OPEN.
COMMUNICATION ADDRESS: consists of COMMUNICATION MEANS and CONTACT
ADDRESS.
COMMUNICATION MEANS: indicates a method whereby communication can take
place. INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE is one example of a COMMUNICATION MEANS.
CONTACT ADDRESS: a specific point of contact via some COMMUNICATION
MEANS. When using an INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE, the CONTACT ADDRESS is
an INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS.
DELIVERY RULES: constraints on how an INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE delivers
received INSTANT MESSAGES to INSTANT INBOXES. For each INSTANT INBOX,
the applicable DELIVERY RULES are manipulated by the INBOX USER AGENT
of a PRINCIPAL that controls the INSTANT INBOX.
Motivation: We need a way of talking about filtering instant
messages.
FETCHER: a form of WATCHER that has asked the PRESENCE SERVICE to
for the PRESENCE INFORMATION of one or more PRESENTITIES, but has
not asked for a SUBSCRIPTION to be created.
INBOX USER AGENT: means for a PRINCIPAL to manipulate zero or more
INSTANT INBOXES controlled by that PRINCIPAL.
Motivation: This is intended to isolate the core functionality of an
INSTANT INBOX from how it might appear to be manipulated by a
product. This manipulation includes fetching messages, deleting
messages, and setting DELIVERY RULES. We deliberately take no position
on whether the INBOX USER AGENT, INSTANT INBOX, and INSTANT MESSAGE
SERVICE are colocated or distributed across machines.
INSTANT INBOX: receptacle for INSTANT MESSAGES intended to be read by
the INSTANT INBOX's PRINCIPAL.
INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS: indicates whether and how the PRESENTITY's
PRINCIPAL can receive an INSTANT MESSAGE in an INSTANT INBOX. The
STATUS and INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS information are sufficient to
determine whether the PRINCIPAL appears ready to accept the INSTANT
MESSAGE.
Motivation: The definition is pretty loose about exactly how
any of this works, even leaving open the possibility of reusing parts
of the email infrastructure for instant messaging.
INSTANT MESSAGE: an identifiable unit of data, of small size, to be
sent to an INSTANT INBOX.
Motivation: We do not define "small" but we seek in this
definition to avoid the possibility of transporting an
arbitrary-length stream labelled as an "instant message."
INSTANT MESSAGE PROTOCOL: The messages that can be exchanged between
a SENDER USER AGENT and an INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE, or
between an INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE and an INSTANT INBOX.
INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE: accepts and delivers INSTANT MESSAGES.
-- May require authentication of SENDER USER AGENTS and/or
INSTANT INBOXES.
-- May have different authentication requirements for different
INSTANT INBOXES, and may also have different authentication
requirements for different INSTANT INBOXES controlled by a
single PRINCIPAL.
-- May have an internal structure involving multiple SERVERS
and/or PROXIES. There may be complex patterns of redirection
and/or proxying while retaining logical connectivity to a single
INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE. Note that an INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE does
not require having a distinct SERVER -- the service may be
implemented as direct communication between SENDER and INSTANT
INBOX.
-- May have an internal structure involving other INSTANT MESSAGE
SERVICES, which may be independently accessible in their own right as
well as being reachable through the initial INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE.
SENDER USER AGENT: means for a PRINCIPAL to manipulate zero or more
SENDERS.
NOTIFICATION: a message sent from the PRESENCE SERVICE to a SUBSCRIBER
when there is a change in the PRESENCE INFORMATION of some PRESENTITY
of interest, as recorded in one or more SUBSCRIPTIONS.
Motivation: We deliberately take no position on what part of the
changed information is included in a NOTIFICATION.
OPEN: a distinguished value of the STATUS marker. In the context of
INSTANT MESSAGES, this value means that the associated INSTANT
INBOX ADDRESS, if any, corresponds to an INSTANT INBOX that is
ready to accept an INSTANT MESSAGE. This value may have an
analogous meaning for other COMMUNICATION MEANS, but any such
meaning is not defined by this model. Contrast with CLOSED.
OTHER PRESENCE MARKUP: any additional information included in the
PRESENCE INFORMATION of a PRESENTITY. The model does not define this
further.
POLLER: a FETCHER that requests PRESENCE INFORMATION on a regular basis.
PRESENCE INFORMATION: consists of one or more PRESENCE TUPLES.
PRESENCE PROTOCOL: The messages that can be exchanged between a
PRESENTITY and a PRESENCE SERVICE, or a WATCHER and a PRESENCE
SERVICE.
PRESENCE SERVICE: accepts, stores, and distributes PRESENCE
INFORMATION.
-- May require authentication of PRESENTITIES, and/or WATCHERS, and/or
INSTANT INBOXES.
-- May have different authentication requirements for different
PRESENTITIES.
-- May have different authentication requirements for different
WATCHERS, and may also have different authentication requirements
for different PRESENTITIES being watched by a single WATCHER.
-- May have an internal structure involving multiple SERVERS
and/or PROXIES. There may be complex patterns of redirection
and/or proxying while retaining logical connectivity to a single
PRESENCE SERVICE. Note that a PRESENCE SERVICE does not require
having a distinct SERVER -- the service may be implemented as
direct communication among PRESENTITY and WATCHERS.
-- May have an internal structure involving other PRESENCE SERVICES,
which may be independently accessible in their own right as well
as being reachable through the initial PRESENCE SERVICE.
PRESENCE TUPLE: consists of a STATUS, an optional COMMUNICATION
ADDRESS, and optional OTHER PRESENCE MARKUP.
PRESENCE USER AGENT: means for a PRINCIPAL to manipulate zero or more
PRESENTITIES.
Motivation: This is essentially a "model/view" distinction: the
PRESENTITY is the model of the presence being exposed, and is
independent of its manifestation in any user interface. In
addition, we deliberately take no position on how the PRESENCE
USER AGENT, PRESENTITY, and PRESENCE SERVICE are colocated or
distributed across machines.
PRESENTITY (presence entity): provides PRESENCE INFORMATION to a
PRESENCE SERVICE.
Motivation: We don't like to coin new words, but "presentity"
seemed worthwhile so as to have an unambiguous term for the entity
of interest to a presence service. Note that the presentity is not
(usually) located in the presence service: the presence service
only has a recent version of the presentity's presence
information. The presentity initiates changes in the presence
information to be distributed by the presence service.
PRINCIPAL: human, program, or collection of humans and/or programs
that chooses to appear to the PRESENCE SERVICE as a single actor,
distinct from all other PRINCIPALS.
Motivation: We need a clear notion of the actors outside the
system. "Principal" seems as good a term as any.
PROXY: a SERVER that communicates PRESENCE INFORMATION, INSTANT
MESSAGES, SUBSCRIPTIONS and/or NOTIFICATIONS to another SERVER. Sometimes
a PROXY acts on behalf of a PRESENTITY, WATCHER, or INSTANT INBOX.
SENDER: source of INSTANT MESSAGES to be delivered by the INSTANT
MESSAGE SERVICE.
SERVER: an indivisible unit of a PRESENCE SERVICE or INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE.
SPAM: unwanted INSTANT MESSAGES.
SPOOFING: a PRINCIPAL improperly imitating another PRINCIPAL.
STALKING: using PRESENCE INFORMATION to infer the whereabouts of a
PRINCIPAL, especially for malicious or illegal purposes.
STATUS: a distinguished part of the PRESENCE INFORMATION of a
PRESENTITY. STATUS has at least the mutually-exclusive values OPEN
and CLOSED, which have meaning for the acceptance of INSTANT MESSAGES,
and may have meaning for other COMMUNICATION MEANS. There may be other
values of STATUS that do not imply anything about INSTANT MESSAGE
acceptance. These other values of STATUS may be combined with OPEN and
CLOSED or they may be mutually-exclusive with those values.
Some implementations may combine STATUS with other entities. For
example, an implementation might make an INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS
visible only when the INSTANT INBOX can accept an INSTANT
MESSAGE. Then, the existence of an INSTANT INBOX ADDRESS implies
OPEN, while its absence implies CLOSED.
SUBSCRIBER: a form of WATCHER that has asked the PRESENCE SERVICE to
notify it immediately of changes in the PRESENCE INFORMATION of one or
more PRESENTITIES.
SUBSCRIPTION: the information kept by the PRESENCE SERVICE about a
SUBSCRIBER's request to be notified of changes in the PRESENCE
INFORMATION of one or more PRESENTITIES.
VISIBILITY RULES: constraints on how a PRESENCE SERVICE makes
WATCHER INFORMATION available to WATCHERS. For each WATCHER's WATCHER
INFORMATION, the applicable VISIBILITY RULES are manipulated by the
WATCHER USER AGENT of a PRINCIPAL that controls the WATCHER.
Motivation: We need a way of talking about hiding watcher information
from people.
WATCHER: requests PRESENCE INFORMATION about a PRESENTITY, or
WATCHER INFORMATION about a WATCHER, from the PRESENCE
SERVICE. Special types of WATCHER are FETCHER, POLLER, and
SUBSCRIBER.
WATCHER INFORMATION: information about WATCHERS that have received
PRESENCE INFORMATION about a particular PRESENTITY within a particular
recent span of time. WATCHER INFORMATION is maintained by the PRESENCE
SERVICE, which may choose to present it in the same form as PRESENCE
INFORMATION; that is, the service may choose to make WATCHERS look
like a special form of PRESENTITY.
Motivation: If a PRESENTITY wants to know who knows about it, it
is not enough to examine only information about SUBSCRIPTIONS. A
WATCHER might repeatedly fetch information without ever
subscribing. Alternately, a WATCHER might repeatedly subscribe,
then cancel the SUBSCRIPTION. Such WATCHERS should be visible to
the PRESENTITY if the PRESENCE SERVICE offers WATCHER INFORMATION,
but will not be appropriately visible if the WATCHER INFORMATION
includes only SUBSCRIPTIONS.
WATCHER USER AGENT: means for a PRINCIPAL to manipulate zero or
more WATCHERS controlled by that PRINCIPAL.
Motivation: As with PRESENCE USER AGENT and PRESENTITY, the
distinction here is intended to isolate the core functionality of a
WATCHER from how it might appear to be manipulated by a product. As
previously, we deliberately take no position on whether the WATCHER
USER AGENT, WATCHER, and PRESENCE SERVICE are colocated or distributed
across machines.
5. Security Considerations
This document provides a model and vocabulary for systems with certain
intrinsic security issues. In particular, presence and instant
messaging systems must deal with "the three S's": STALKING, SPOOFING,
and SPAM. ACCESS RULES, VISIBILITY RULES, and WATCHER INFORMATION are
intended to deal with STALKING. The several kinds of authentication
mentioned for INSTANT MESSAGE SERVICE and PRESENCE SERVICE are
intended to deal with SPOOFING. DELIVERY RULES are intended to deal
with SPAM.
6. Conclusion
This document has provided a model for a presence and instant
messaging system. The purpose of the model is to provide a common
vocabulary for the further work of defining and implementing
interoperable presence and instant messaging protocols.
7. Acknowledgements
This document has been improved by comments from Jesse Vincent and
Colin Benson, by the participants in the Cambridge, MA meeting on June
11, 1999, and by Roy Salisbury, who contributed Figure 5. The authors
gratefully acknowledge their assistance.
8. References
[ENVY] M. Day. ''HTTP Envy'' and Presence Information Protocols.
Internet-Draft draft-day-envy-00.txt
[PIPR] M. Calsyn, L. Dusseault. Presence Information Protocol
Requirements. Internet-Draft draft-dusseault-pipr-00.txt
[PRESENCE] V. Saraswat, J. Malcolm, C. Apple. The Presence
Protocol. Internet-Draft draft-saraswat-presenceprotocol-00.txt
[RPIM] M. Day. Requirements for Presence and Instant Messaging.
Internet-Draft draft-day-rpim-00.txt
[RVP-ADDR] L. Dusseault, G. Mohr. Addressing and Location for
RVP. Internet-Draft draft-dusseault-rvp-addr-00.txt
[RVP] M. Calsyn, L. Dusseault, G. Mohr. RVP: A Presence Notification
Protocol. Internet-Draft draft-calsyn-rvp-01.txt
[SIP-PIP] J. Rosenberg, H.Schulzrinne. SIP For Presence.
Internet-Draft draft-rosenberg-sip-pip-00.txt
[WHODP] G. Mohr. WhoDP: Widely Hosted Object Data Protocol.
Internet-Draft draft-mohr-whodp-00.txt
9. Authors' Addresses
Mark Day
Lotus Development Corporation
55 Cambridge Parkway
Cambridge, MA 02142
USA
email: Mark_Day@lotus.com
Jonathan Rosenberg
Lucent Technologies, Bell Laboratories
Rm. 4C-526
101 Crawfords Corner Rd.
Holmdel, NJ 07733
USA
email: jdrosen@bell-labs.com
Hiroyasu Sugano
Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd.
64 Nishiwaki, Ohkubo-cho
Akashi 674-8555
Japan
email: suga@flab.fujitsu.co.jp
Datatracker
Report a datatracker bug
draft-ietf-impp-model-02
Internet-Draft
| Document | Document type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 2778.
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Select version | |||
| Compare versions | |||
| Author | |||
| RFC stream |
|
||
| Other formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion |