[Search] [txt|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00                                                            
                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006


Lemonade
Internet Draft: Lemonade Notifications and                   S. H. Maes
Filters
Document: draft-ietf-lemonade-notification-
protocol-00.txt
Expires: December 2006                                        June 2006


                      Lemonade Notification protocol

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   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 Internet-Draft will expire on November 30, 2006.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

Abstract

   This document introduces a notification protocol as a specified
   particular case of the notification mechanisms used by the Lemonade
   profile [LEMONADEPROFILEBIS] in [NOTIFICATIONS].

   This document also discusses the use of Lemonade notifications to
   implement server to server notifications.

Conventions used in this document


Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 1]


                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006



   In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
   server respectively.

   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 [RFC2119].

   An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more
   of the MUST or REQUIRED level requirements for the protocol(s) it
   implements. An implementation that satisfies all the MUST or REQUIRED
   level and all the SHOULD level requirements for a protocol is said to
   be "unconditionally compliant" to that protocol; one that satisfies
   all the MUST level requirements but not all the SHOULD level
   requirements is said to be "conditionally compliant."  When
   describing the general syntax, some definitions are omitted as they
   are defined in [RFC3501].


Table of Contents

   Status of this Memo...............................................1
   Copyright Notice..................................................1
   Abstract..........................................................1
   Conventions used in this document.................................1
   Table of Contents.................................................2
   1. Introduction...................................................2
   2. Usage Model....................................................3
      2.1. Notification protocol in Lemonade Profile Bis.............3
      2.2. Notification protocol for generic server to server
      notifications..................................................4
   3. Notification protocol..........................................5
      3.1. Protocol details and guidelines...........................6
   Security Considerations...........................................6
   References........................................................6
   Future Work.......................................................6
   Acknowledgments...................................................6
   Authors Addresses.................................................7
   Intellectual Property Statement...................................7
   Disclaimer of Validity............................................7
   Copyright Statement...............................................8
   Acknowledgement...................................................8


1.
   Introduction

   This draft provides a notification protocols for [NOTIFICATIONS] and
   the Lemonade profile.



Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 2]


                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006


2.
  Usage Model

   2.1.
        Notification protocol in Lemonade Profile Bis

   The target logical architectures involving the LEMONADE Profile and
   notifications are discussed in [LEMONADEPROFILEBIS].




































   Figure 1 illustrates how notification and filtering can be introduced
   in the context of LEMONADE profile bis.




                     +--------------+_____________


Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 3]


                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006


                     |              |
           +---------| Notification |
           |         | Mechanism    |
           |         +----------^---+
           |Notif.              |
           |Protocol -------\  +|-+_
           |   ______|   +---\>|NF|----+____
           |  |          |     +--+    |                +-----+ _____
         __v__|   IMAP   +--+_LEMONADE +---+__ESMTP  +--+     |
        +-----+<-------->|VF| IMAP     |DF |<--------|AF| MTA |
        | MUA |\   ME-2a +--+ Store    +-^-+         +--+_____|
        |_____| \        +-------------+ |              +-----+
        +-----+--\---------------|-------+
                  \              |URLAUTH
                   \SUBMIT       |
                    \       +----v-----+_____
                     \      |          |                +-----+ _____
                      \     | LEMONADE |      ESMTP     |     |
                       ---->| Submit   |--------------->| MTA |
                   ME-2b    | Server   |                |_____|
                            |__________|                +-----+
                            +----------+

   Figure 1: Filtering mechanism defined in LEMONADE Profile bis
   architecture.

   In Figure 1, the notification protocol MAY be used between NF in the
   Lemonade IMAP Store and a compliant Notification mechanism.

   Note that in general [LEMONADEPROFILEBIS] does not mandate the use of
   the present notification protocol. It is also possible that NF
   interacts with the notification mechanisms via protocols specific to
   each of the notification mechanisms. The present draft solely
   provides a generic protocol to do so that the notification mechanism
   MAY support.

   2.2.
        Notification protocol for generic server to server
       notifications

   As discussed in [NOTIFICATIONS], with server to server notifications,
   a messaging system (e.g. email server, voice mail system, etc.)
   submits alerts, which describe potential notification events,
   regarding an end user mailbox status change (e.g. new message has
   arrived, mailbox is full, etc.).

   These alerts are sent to a notification mechanisms, which may, in
   turn, generate an end user alert notification.




Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 4]


                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006


   The present notification protocol MAY be used as a generic way to
   interface with each server to server notification mechanisms.

   As described in {NOTIFICATIONS], it is also possible to interact with
   the notification mechanisms via protocols specific to each of the
   notification mechanism. The present draft solely provides a generic
   protocol to do so that the notification mechanism MAY support.

   The figure 2 depicts the server to server notification scope:

              +--------+                                 +--------+
       New    |        |                                 |  SMS   |
      Message | Email  | \                               |Gateway |
     -------> |Server 1|  \                           _  |        |
              +--------+   \                          /| +--------+
                          ^ \                        /
                          |  \                      / ^
                          |   \ +--------------+   /  |  +--------+
              +--------+  |    _|+-------------|+ /   |  |  MWI   |
      Read    | Voice  |  |     ||              |/    |  |Gateway |
     Message  |  Mail  |-------->| Notification |------->|        |
     -------> | Server |  | ^ _ +|  Mechanisms  |\  ^ |  +--------+
              +--------+  | | /| +--------------- \ | |
                          | |/               \     \| |
                          | / ^               \   ^ \ |
                          |/| |                \  | |\|
              +--------+  / | |                 \ | | \  +--------+
      Mailbox |        | /| | |                  \| | |\ |  Wap   |
      Full    | Email  |/ | | |                 ^ \ | |_||  Push  |
     -------> |Server 2|  | | |                 | |\| |  |Gateway |
              +--------+  | | |                 | | \ |  +--------+
                          | | |                 | | |\|
                          | | |                 | | | \
                          | | |                 | | | |\
                          | | |                 | | | |_|+--------+
                          | | |                 | | | |  | IM     |
                          | | |                 | | | |  |Gateway |
                          | | |                 | | | |  |        |
                          | | |                 | | | |  +--------+
                          | | |                 | | | |
                        Server to                OTHER
                          Server               PROTOCOLS
                      Notifications

   Figure 2: Scope of server to server notifications

3.
  Notification protocol




Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 5]


                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006


   The notification protocol MUST follow the [PARLAYXMULTIMEDIA]
   protocol (over SOAP).

   3.1.
        Protocol details and guidelines

   <Editor’s note: To be Done

Security Considerations

   Notifications must be secured (when useful information is sent) and
   integrity should be checkable.

   It should be possible to authenticate sender and prevent Denial of
   Service attack via notifications.


References


   [LEMONADEPROFILE] Maes, S.H. and Melnikov A., "Lemonade Profile",
      draft-ietf-lemonade-profile-XX.txt, (work in progress).

   [LEMONADEPROFILEBIS] Maes, S.H., Melnikov A. and D. Cridland, "
      LEMONADE profile bis", draft-ietf-lemonade-profile-bis-xx.txt,
      (work in progress).

   [NOTIFICATIONS] Maes, S.H. and all, "Lemonade Notifications and
      Filtering", draft-maes-lemonade-notifications-server-to-client-
      XX.txt, (work in progress).

   [PARLAYXMULTIMEDIA] ETSI, Open Service Access (OSA); Parlay X Web
      Services; Part 5: Multimedia Messaging - ETSI ES 202 391-5 V1.1.1
      (2005-03), URL:
      http://www.parlay.org/en/specifications/docs/es_20239105v010101p.z
      ip



Future Work

   [1] Determine WG views.

   [2] Detail usage model and guidelines

   [3] Clean up draft with respect to [NOTIFICATIONS]

Acknowledgments




Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 6]


                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006


   The authors want to thank the authors of the original work on Server
   To Server Notification Protocol Requirements (draft-ietf-lemonade-
   notify-s2s-00) whose material has been incorporated in the present
   document, in particular: Gev Decktor.

Authors Addresses

   Stephane H. Maes
   Oracle Corporation
   500 Oracle Parkway
   M/S 4op634
   Redwood Shores, CA 94065
   USA
   Phone: +1-650-607-6296
   Email: stephane.maes@oracle.com

Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
   ipr@ietf.org.

Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.


Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 7]


                   <Lemonade Notification Protocol>          June 2006



Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.








































Maes                   Expires – December 2006               [Page 8]