SIMPLE E. Burger
Internet-Draft Cantata Technology
Intended status: Informational H. Khartabil
Expires: April 16, 2007 Telio
October 13, 2006
Instant Message Disposition Notification
draft-ietf-simple-imdn-01
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 April 16, 2007.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract
Instant Messaging (IM) refers to the transfer of messages between
users in real-time. This document provides a mechanism whereby
endpoints can request Instant Message Disposition Notifications
(IMDN), including delivery, processing and read notifications, for
page-mode as well as session mode instant messages.
The Common Profile for Instant Messaging (CPIM) data format specified
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
in RFC 3862 is extended with new headers that enable endpoints to
request IMDNs. A new message format is also defined to convey IMDNs.
This document also describes how SIP and MSRP entities behave using
this extension.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Disposition Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.1. Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.2. Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.3. Read . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. New CPIM Header Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1. CPIM Header Namespace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.2. Disposition-Notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.3. Message-ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.4. Original-To . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.5. IMDN-Record-Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.6. IMDN-Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Endpoint Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1. IM Sender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1.1. Constructing Instant Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1.2. Matching IMs with IMDNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1.3. Aggregation of IMDNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1.4. Keeping State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.2. IM Recipient . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.2.1. Constructing IMDNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Intermediary Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8.1. Constructing Processing Notifications . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.2. Aggregation of IMDNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. Identifying Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10. Header Fields Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
11. IMDN Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11.1. Structure of XML-Encoded IMDN Payload . . . . . . . . . . 18
11.1.1. The <message-id> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11.1.2. The <datetime> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1.3. The <recipient-uri> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1.4. The <original-recipient-uri> Element . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1.5. The <subject> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1.6. The <disposition> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1.7. The <status> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11.1.8. The <note> Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11.2. MIME Type for IMDN Paylaod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
11.3. The RelaxNG Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
12. Transporting Messages using SIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12.1. Endpoint Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
12.1.1. Sending Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
12.1.2. Sending Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
12.1.3. Receiving Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
12.2. Intermediary Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
13. Transporting Messages using MSRP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
13.1. Endpoint Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
13.1.1. Sending Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
13.1.2. Sending Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
13.1.3. Receiving Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
13.2. Intermediary Behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
14. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
14.1. Forgery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
14.2. Confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
14.3. Non-Repudiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
15. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
15.1. message/imdn+xml MIME TYPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
15.2. URN Sub-Namespace Registration for
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:imdn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
15.3. Schema Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
15.4. Message/CPIM Header Field registration . . . . . . . . . . 32
15.5. Content-Disposition: notification . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
16. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
17. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
17.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
17.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 35
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
1. Introduction
In many user-to-user message exchange systems, message senders often
wish to know if the human recipient actually received or read a
message.
Electronic Mail [12] deals with this situation with Message Delivery
Notifications [13]. After the recipient views the message, her mail
user agent generates a Message Delivery Notification, or MDN. The
MDN is an e-mail that follows the format prescribed by RFC2298 [13].
The fixed format ensures that an automaton can process the message.
Message/CPIM [2] is a message format used to generate instant
messages. SIP [9] can carry instant messages generated using
message/CPIM in SIP MESSAGE requests [10]. The MSRP [11] SEND
request can also be used to carry Message/CPIM messages.
This document extends Message/CPIM message format (much like Message
Delivery Notifications [13] extends Electronic Mail [12]) to enable
Instant Message Senders to request, create and send Instant Message
Disposition Notifications (IMDN) for a page-mode as well as session
mode instant messages. IMDNs include positive delivery, negative
delivery (i.e. a message did not get delivered successfully), read
notifications as well as processed notifications. By using CPIM
headers, the IMDN request and delivery are abstracted outside the
transport protocol allowing interoperability between different IM
systems. Likewise, the mechanism does not rely on session-mode
versus page-mode.
This document also describes how SIP and MSRP entities behave using
this extension.
2. Conventions
In this document, the key words 'MUST', 'MUST NOT', 'REQUIRED',
'SHALL', 'SHALL NOT', 'SHOULD', 'SHOULD NOT', 'RECOMMENDED', 'MAY',
and 'OPTIONAL' are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [1] and
indicate requirement levels for compliant implementations.
3. Terminology
o IM: An Instant Message generated using the Message/CPIM format.
o IMDN: An Instant Message Disposition Notification generated using
the Message/CPIM format that carries a IMDN XML document.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
o Message: an IM or an IMDN generated using the Message/CPIM format.
o IM Sender: An endpoint (User Agent) generating and sending an IM.
It is also the endpoint that requests IMDNs for an IM. Quite
often, the IM Sender is the IMDN Recipient, but that is not always
true.
o IM Recipient: An endpoint (User Agent) that receives IMs. It is
also the endpoint that generates and sends IMDNs to IMs, if
requested by the IM Sender.
o Endpoint: An IM Sender or an IM Recipient.
o Intermediary: An entity in the network that is on the path of an
IM to its final destination.
o IMDN Payload or XML Document: An XML document carrying the
disposition notification information. It is always of MIME type
"message/imdn+xml".
o Disposition type: the type of IMDN that can be requested. This
specification defines three, namely "delivery", "processing" and
"read" disposition types.
o Transport Protocol Message: An IM or an IMDN wrapped in a
transport protocol like SIP or MSRP.
4. Overview
The basic protocol flow is depicted in the diagram below. An IM
Sender creates an IM, adds to it IMDN request information it is
interested in receiving, then sends its. At a certain point in time,
the IM Recipient or an intermediary determines that the user or
application has received, did not receive or has read the IM or
otherwise disposed the IM. The mechanism by which an IM Recipient
determines its user has read an IM is beyond the scope of this
document. At that point, the IM Recipient or intermediary
automatically generates a notification message to the IM Sender.
This notification message is the Instant Message Disposition
Notification (IMDN).
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
+--------------+ +--------------+
| IM Sender | | IM Recipient |
|IMDN Recipient| | IMDN Sender |
+--------------+ +--------------+
| |
| |
| 1. IM requesting IMDN |
|-------------------------------------->|
| |
| |
| 2. IMDN (disposition) |
|<--------------------------------------|
| |
| |
Note that the recipient of an IMDN, in some instances, may not be the
IM Sender. This is specifically true for page-mode IMs where the
Address of Record (AOR) of the IM Sender, that is present in the
IMDN, resolves to a different location to where the IM originated.
For simplicity, the rest of this document assumes that the IM Sender
and the IMDN Recipient are the same and therefore will refer to both
as the IM Sender.
5. Disposition Types
There are three broad categories of disposition states. They are
delivery, processing and read. Future extensions may introduce
others.
5.1. Delivery
The delivery notification type indicates whether the IM has been
delivered to the IM Recipient or not. The delivery notification type
can have the following states:
o "delivered" to indicate successful delivery.
o "failed" to indicate failure in delivery.
o "forbidden" indicate denial by the IM Recipient for the IM Sender
to receive the requested IMDN.
o "error" to indicate an error in determining the fate of an IM.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
5.2. Processing
The processing notification type indicates that an IM has been
processed by an intermediary. The processing notification type can
have the following states:
o "processed" is a general state of the IM indicating it has been
processed.
o "stored" state indicates that the IM has been stored by the
intermediary for later delivery.
o "forbidden" indicate denial by the IM Recipient for the IM Sender
to receive the requested IMDN.
o "error" to indicate an error in determining the fate of an IM.
5.3. Read
The read notification type indicates whether the IM Recipient
displayed the IM to the user or not. The read notification type can
have the following states:
o "read" is a state indicating that the IM has been read.
o "forbidden" indicate denial by the IM Recipient for the IM Sender
to receive the requested IMDN.
o "error" to indicate an error in determining the fate of an IM.
Since there is no positive acknowledgement from the user, one cannot
determine a priori that the user actually read the IM. Thus one MUST
NOT use the protocol described here as a non-repudiation service.
6. New CPIM Header Fields
This specification extends the CPIM data format specified in RFC 3862
[2]. A new namespace is created as well as a number of new CPIM
headers.
6.1. CPIM Header Namespace
Per CPIM [2], this specification defines a new namespace for the CPIM
extension headers defined in the following sections. The namespace
is: urn:ietf:params:cpim-headers:imdn As per CPIM [2] requirements,
the new headers defined in the following sections are prepended by
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
the string "imdn." in CPIM messages.
6.2. Disposition-Notification
The Disposition-Notification header field is used by the IM Sender to
indicate the desire to receive IMDNs, from the IM Recipient, for that
specific IM. This header field is not needed if the IM Sender does
not request an IMDN. The syntax is defined in Section 10.
6.3. Message-ID
The Message-ID header field contains a globally unique message
identifier that is used by the IM Sender to correlate received IMDNs
by comparing its value with the value of the <message-id> element
present in the IMDN payload. This header field is mandatory with
sending an IM and requesting an IMDN. IMDNs also carry this header
field. The syntax is defined in Section 10.
6.4. Original-To
The Original-To header field is sometimes added to an IM by an
intermediary and populated with of the address of the IM Sender. It
is used by the IM Recipient to indicate in the IMDNs (by populating
the <original-recipient-uri> element) the original address the IM was
sent to. This header is mandatory if the intermediary changes the
CPIM To header field value. The header MUST NOT appear more than
once in an IM. The header field value MUST NOT be changed by an
intermediary if it was already present. The syntax is defined in
Section 10.
6.5. IMDN-Record-Route
Intermediaries have the capability of indicating that IMDNs should be
sent through it (otherwise, IMDNs will not visit the intermediary).
An intermediary that request IMDNs to be sent through itself adds an
IMDN-Record-Route header field to the IM. The value of the IMDN-
Record-Route header field is set to the address of that intermediary.
Multiple IMDN-Record-Route header fields can appear in an IM. The
syntax is defined in Section 10.
6.6. IMDN-Route
The IMDN-Route header field provides routing information by including
one or more addresses where an IMDN must be routed through. On
creating an IMDN, an IM recipient copies the contents of the IMDN-
Record-Route present in the IM into the IMDN-Route of the IMDN.
Multiple IMDN-Route header fields can appear in an IMDN. The syntax
is defined in Section 10.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
7. Endpoint Behaviour
7.1. IM Sender
7.1.1. Constructing Instant Messages
An IM is constructed using RFC 3862 [2]. The Content-type header
field indicates the MIME type of the request payload.
7.1.1.1. Adding a Message-ID Header Field
If the IM sender requests the reception of IMDNs, the IM sender MUST
include a Message-ID header field. The Message-ID field is populated
with a value that is unique with 32 bits of randomness. This header
field enables the IM Sender to match any IMDNs with their
corresponding IMs.
7.1.1.2. Adding a DateTime Header Field
Some devices may not implement the concept of "Sent Items" box and
therefore no information about an IM is stored. It is therefore
necessary to add a time stamp in the IM to indicate when it was sent.
This time stamp is returned in the IMDN in order to enable the user
to correlate the IM with the IMDN at the human level. The DateTime
header field is used for this purpose. The IM MUST contain a
DateTime header field if an IMDN is requested.
7.1.1.3. Adding a Disposition-Notification Header Field
In this specification, the IM Sender can request two types of
delivery notifications: a failure delivery notification and a success
delivery notification. An IM Sender requests failure delivery
notification by including a Disposition-Notification header field
with value "negative-delivery". Similarly, a success notification is
requested by including a Disposition-Notification header field with
value "positive-delivery". Both types of delivery notifications can
be requested for the same IM.
The IM Sender can request a processing notification by including a
Disposition-Notification header field with value "processing".
The IM Sender can also request a read notification. It is requested
by including a Disposition-Notification header field with value
"read".
The absence of this header or the presence of the header with empty
value indicates that the IM Sender is not requesting any IMDNs. The
Disposition-Notification header fields can be comma separated.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
Future extension may define other disposition notifications not
defined in this document. The IM Sender MAY request more than one
type of IMDN for a single IM.
The formal syntax of the Disposition-Notification header field can be
found in Section 10. The following in an example IM where the IM
Sender requests positive and negative delivery notifications, but not
read notification nor processing notifications:
Content-type: Message/CPIM
From: Alice <im:alice@example.com>
To: Bob <im:bob@example.com>
NS: imdn <urn:ietf:params:cpim-headers:imdn>
imdn.Message-ID: 34jk324j
DateTime: 2006-04-04T12:16:49-05:00
imdn.Disposition-Notification: positive-delivery, negative-delivery
Content-type: text/plain
Content-length: 12
Hello World
7.1.2. Matching IMs with IMDNs
An IM Sender matches an IMDN to an IM by matching the Message-ID
header field value in the IM with the <message-id> element value in
the body of the IMDN. If the IM was delivered to multiple
recipients, the IM Sender uses the <recipient-uri> element or the
<original-recipient-uri> element in the XML body of the IMDN it
received to identify the IM Recipient (IMDN Sender).
7.1.3. Aggregation of IMDNs
An IM Sender may send an IM to multiple recipients in one Transport
Protocol Message (typically using a URI-List server) and request
IMDNs. It MAY choose to either get one IMDN from each IM Recipient
individually or get an aggregated IMDN (the URI-List server
aggregates the IMDNs and send the one or more aggregated IMDNs). The
IM Sender requests aggregation by adding the Disposition-Notification
header field parameter "aggregate". The absence of such a parameter
indicates that the IM Sender does not wish for IMDNs to be
aggregated. Aggregation can be requested per disposition type. For
example, a IM Sender can request delivery notification to be
aggregated but read notifications to be sent individually. For
example:
Disposition-Notification: positive-delivery;aggregate, read
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
The following is an example of an IM Sender requesting aggregation of
both positive delivery notifications and read notifications:
Disposition-Notification: positive-delivery;aggregate, read;aggregate
An IM Sender that requested an aggregated IMDN MUST be prepared to
receive multiple aggregated or non-aggregated IMDNs. See Section 8.2
for details.
An IM Sender MUST be prepared to receive aggregated IMDNs even if it
did not request the URI-List server to do so. See again Section 8.2
for details. Note that the "aggregate" parameter is a hint for
intermediaries and does not require the intermediaries to aggregate
IMDNs.
7.1.4. Keeping State
This specification does not mandate the IM Sender to keep state for a
sent IM.
Once an IM Sender sends an IM containing an IMDN request, it MAY
preserve the IM context, principally the Message-ID, and other user-
identifiable information such as the IM subject or content, and date
and time it was sent. Without preservation of the IM context, the IM
Sender will not be able to correlate the IMDN with the IM it sent.
The IM Sender may find it impossible to preserve IM state if it has
limited resources or does not have non-volatile memory and then loses
power.
There is, however, the concept of "Sent Items" box in an application
that stores sent IMs. This "Sent Items" box has the necessary
information and may have a fancy user interface indicating the state
of a sent IM. Unique Message-ID for this purpose proves to be
useful. The length of time for items to remain in the "Sent Items"
box is a user choice. The user is usually free to keep or delete
items from the "Sent Items" box as she pleases or as the memory on
the device reaches capacity.
Clearly, if an IM Sender loses its sent items state (user deletes
items from the "Send Items" box), the client may use a different
display strategy in response to apparently unsolicited IMDNs.
This specification also does not mandate an IM Sender to run any
timers waiting for an IMDN. There are no time limits associated with
when IMDNs may be received.
IMDNs may legitimately never be received. On the other hand, and
IMDN may simply take a very long time. Some clients may choose to
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
purge the state associated with the sent IM. This is the reason for
adding the time stamp in the IM and having it returned in the IMDN.
This gives the user some opportunity of remembering what IM was sent.
For example if the IMDN indicates that the IM the user sent at 2 p.m.
last Thursday was delivered, the user has a chance of remembering
that they sent an IM at 2 p.m. last Thursday.
7.2. IM Recipient
7.2.1. Constructing IMDNs
IM recipients examine the contents of the Disposition-Notification
header field of the CPIM message to determine if an IMDN must be
generated for that IM. Disposition-Notification header fields of
CPIM messages can include one or more values. This implies that IM
recipients may need to generate zero, one, or more IMDNs for that IM,
for example a delivery notification as well as a read notification.
In this case the IM Recipient MUST be able to construct multiple
IMDNs per IM. An IM Recipient MUST NOT construct more than one IMDN
per disposition type. I.e. It must not, for example, generate a
delivery notification indicating "delivered" then followed by a
delivery notification indicating "failed" for the same IM. If the IM
Sender requested only failure notifications and the IM was
successfully delivered, then no IMDNs will be generated.
The IM Recipient MUST NOT generate processing notifications.
Disposition-Notification header MUST NOT appear in an IMDN since it
does not make sense and is therefore forbidden to request an IMDN for
an IMDN. IM Sender MUST ignore it if present. The IM Sender MUST
NOT send an IMDN to an IMDN.
An IMDN MUST contain a Message-ID header field. The same rules of
uniqueness for the Message-ID header field that appears in an IM
apply to an IMDN.
An IM may contain a IMDN-Record-Route header field (see Section 8 for
details). If IMDN-Record-Route header fields appear in the IM, the
IM Recipient constructing the IMDN MUST copy the contents of the
IMDN-Record-Route header fields into IMDN-Route header fields in the
IMDN and maintain the order. The IMDN is then sent to the address in
the top IMDN-Route header field.
7.2.1.1. Constructing Delivery Notifications
A delivery notification is constructed in a similar fashion as an IM,
using RFC 3862 [2]. For delivery notifications, the Content-type
MUST be of type "message/imdn+xml". It is an XML document. The
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
schema is described Section 11. The delivery notification MUST
contain a Content-Disposition header field with value "notification".
This indicates to the IM Sender that the message is an IMDN to an IM
it has earlier sent.
An example looks like the following:
Content-type: Message/CPIM
From: Bob <im:bob@example.com>
To: Alice <im:alice@example.com>
NS: imdn <urn:ietf:params:cpim-headers:imdn>
imdn.Message-ID: d834jied93rf
Content-type: message/imdn+xml
Content-Disposition: notification
Content-length: ...
<imdn>
<message-id>34jk324j</message-id>
<datetime>2006-04-04T12:16:49-05:00</datetime>
<recipient-uri>im:bob@example.com</recipient-uri>
<original-recipient-uri>im:bob@example.com</original-recipient-uri>
<disposition>
<delivery/>
</disposition>
<status>
<delivered/>
</status>
<note lang="en">The IM was successfully Delivered</note>
</imdn>
7.2.1.2. Constructing Read Notifications
A read notification is constructed in a similar fashion as the
delivery notification. See Section 7.2.1.1 for details.
An example looks like the following:
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
Content-type: Message/CPIM
From: Bob <im:bob@example.com>
To: Alice <im:alice@example.com>
NS: imdn <urn:ietf:params:cpim-headers:imdn>
imdn.Message-ID: dfjkleriou432333
Content-type: message/imdn+xml
Content-Disposition: notification
Content-length: ...
<imdn>
<message-id>34jk324j</message-id>
<datetime>2006-04-04T12:16:49-05:00</datetime>
<recipient-uri>im:bob@example.com</recipient-uri>
<original-recipient-uri>im:bob@example.com</original-recipient-uri>
<disposition>
<read/>
</disposition>
<status>
<read/>
</status>
<note lang="en">The IM has been read</note>
</imdn>
There are situations where the IM Recipient cannot determine if or
when the IM has been read. The IM Recipient in this case generates a
read notification with a <status> value of "error" to indicate an
internal error by the server.
8. Intermediary Behaviour
In this context, application servers (including URI-List servers and
Store-and-Forward server) and gateways are defined as intermediaries.
An intermediary that forwards an IM MAY change the recipient address
in the CPIM To header field when forwarding (for example, a URI-List
server changes the IM Recipient address from its own to the address
of the final recipient of that IM for every copy it makes to be sent
to the list members). In this case, the intermediary MUST add an
Original-To header field to the IM populating it with the address
that was in the To header field before it was changed. I.e. The
Original-To header is populated with the intermediary address. An
intermediary MUST NOT add an Original-To header field if one already
exists.
An intermediary MAY choose to remain on the path of IMDNs for a
specific IM. It can do so by adding a CPIM IMDN-Record-Route header
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
field as the top IMDN-Record-Route header and populating it with its
own address. An intermediary that does not support this extension
will obviously not add the IMDN-Record-Route header. This allows
IMDNs to traverse directly from the IM Recipient to the IM Sender
even if the IM traversed an intermediary not supporting this
extension.
An intermediary receiving an IMDN checks the top IMDN-Route header
field. If that header field carries the intermediary address, the
intermediary pops that header and forwards the IMDN to the address
indicated in the now top IMDN-Route header. If no IMDN-Route headers
are present, the IMDN is forwarded to the address in the To header
field.
An intermediary MUST remove any information about the final
recipients of a list if the list membership is not disclosed. The
intermediary does that by removing the <recipient-uri> element and/or
<original-recipient-uri> element from the body of the IMDN before
forwarding it to the IM Sender.
8.1. Constructing Processing Notifications
Intermediaries are the only entities that construct processing
notifications. They do so only if the IM Sender has requested a
processing notification by including a Disposition-Notification
header field with value "processing".
The intermediary can create and send processing notifications
indicating that an IM has been processed or stored. The intermediary
MUST NOT send more than one IMDN for the same disposition type. I.e.
It must not send a processing notification indicating that an IM is
being "processed" followed by another IMDN indicating that the same
IM is "stored".
A processing notification is constructed in a similar fashion as the
delivery notification. See Section 7.2.1.1 for details.
An example looks like the following:
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
Content-type: Message/CPIM
From: Bob <im:bob@example.com>
To: Alice <im:alice@example.com>
Content-type: message/imdn+xml
Content-Disposition: notification
Content-length: ...
<imdn>
<message-id>34jk324j</message-id>
<datetime>2006-04-04T12:16:49-05:00</datetime>
<recipient-uri>im:bob@example.com</recipient-uri>
<original-recipient-uri>im:bob@example.com</original-recipient-uri>
<disposition>
<processing/>
</disposition>
<status>
<processed/>
</status>
<note lang="en">The IM has been processed</note>
</imdn>
There are situations where the intermediary cannot know the fate of
an IM. The intermediary in this case generates a processing
notification with a <status> value of "error" to indicate so.
8.2. Aggregation of IMDNs
In this context, URI-List servers are defined as intermediaries.
When a URI-List server receives an IM, it needs to examine
Disposition-Notification header fields. If an IMDN request contains
the "aggregate" parameter, the URI-List server MUST wait for a
configurable period of time or until all recipients have sent the
IMDN (whichever comes first) before the URI-List server sends an
aggregated IMDN. Note that some IMDNs, for example read
notifications, may never come due to user settings. It is an
administrator configuration and an implementation issue how long to
wait before sending an aggregated IMDN and before a URI-List server
removes state for that IM.
A URI-List server MAY choose to send multiple aggregated IMDNs even
if the requester asked for one aggregated IM. A timer can be started
and when it fires, the URI-List server can aggregate whatever IMDNs
it has so far for that IM, send the aggregated IMDN and restart the
timer for the next batch. This is needed for scenarios where the IM
Sender has requested more than one IMDN for a specific IM, for
example, delivery notifications as well as read notifications, or
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
when the URI-List server is short on resources and chooses to
prioritise forwarding IMs over IMDNs. A second timer can be running
and when it fires, the state of the IM is deleted. In this case, the
URI-List server consumes any IMDNs that might arrive after that time.
A URI-List server MAY aggregate IMDNs even if the IM Sender did not
request it to do so. This is to handle the case where the list
membership information is not disclosed. The URI-List server MAY
also choose to ignore an aggregation request and send individual
IMDNs instead.
The aggregated IMDN is constructed using the multipart/mixed MIME
type and including all the received IMDNs as message/imdn+xml as
individual payloads.
There are scenarios where an intermediary needs to generate IMDNs,
see Section 12.2 for further details.
9. Identifying Messages
Messages are typically carried in a transport protocol like SIP [9].
The message is an IM if the content-type header field present in it
has a value that is NOT "message/imdn+xml".
A message is identified as a delivery notification by examining its
contents. The message is a delivery notification if: the Content-
type header field present has a value of "message/imdn+xml", the
Content-Disposition header field has a value of "notification", and
the <disposition> element in that xml body has a sub-element
<delivery>.
A message is identified as a processing notification or read
notification in a similar fashion as a delivery notification. The
difference is that the <disposition> element in that xml body has a
sub-element of <processing> and <read> respectively.
10. Header Fields Formal Syntax
The following syntax specification uses the message header syntax as
described in Section 3 of RFC3862 [2].
Header syntax is described without a namespace qualification.
Following the rules in RFC3862 [2], header names and other text are
case sensitive and MUST be used as given, using exactly the indicated
upper-case and lower-case letters.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
Disposition-Notification =
"Disposition-Notification" ": " [(notify-req *(COMMA notify-req))]
notify-req =
("negative-delivery" / "positive-delivery" /
"processing" / "read" / Token) *(SEMI disp-notif-params)
disp-notify-params = "aggregate" / generic-param
Message-ID = "Message-ID" ": " Token
Original-To = "Original-To" ": " [ Formal-name ] "<" URI ">"
IMDN-Record-Route = "IMDN-Record-Route" ": " [ Formal-name ] "<" URI ">"
IMDN-Route = "IMDN-Route" ": " [ Formal-name ] "<" URI ">"
11. IMDN Format
11.1. Structure of XML-Encoded IMDN Payload
An IMDN Payload is an XML document [7] that MUST be well-formed and
MUST be valid according to schemas, including extension schemas,
available to the validater and applicable to the XML document. The
IMDN Payload MUST be based on XML 1.0 and MUST be encoded using
UTF-8.
The namespace identifier for elements defined by this specification
is a URN [4], using the namespace identifier 'ietf' defined by [5]
and extended by [3]. This urn is: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:imdn.
This namespace declaration indicates the namespace on which the IMDN
is based.
The root element is <imdn>. The <imdn> element has sub-elements,
namely <message-id>, <datetime>, <recipient-uri>, <original-
recipient-uri>, <subject>, <disposition>, <status>, and <note>.
Those elements are described in details in the following sections.
<disposition> and <status> can be extended in the future to include
new sub-elements not defined in this document. Those new elements
MUST be defined in an RFC.
11.1.1. The <message-id> Element
The <message-id> element is mandatory according to the XML schema and
carries the message id that appeared in the Message-ID header field
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
of the IM.
11.1.2. The <datetime> Element
The <datetime> element is mandatory and carries the date and time the
IM was sent (not the IMDN). This information is obtained from the
DateTime header field of the IM.
11.1.3. The <recipient-uri> Element
The <recipient-uri> element is optional and carries the URI of the
final recipient. This information is obtained from the To header
field of the IM.
11.1.4. The <original-recipient-uri> Element
The <original-recipient-uri> element is optional and carries the URI
of the original recipient. It MUST be present if the IM carried the
Original-To header field. This information is obtained from the
Original-To header field of the IM.
11.1.5. The <subject> Element
The <subject> element is optional and carries the text that was in
the Subject header field, if any. This allows for a human level
correlation between an IM and an IMDN.
11.1.6. The <disposition> Element
The <disposition> element is mandatory and carries the disposition
type that the IM Sender requested and is being reported. It can
carry one of the sub-elements <delivery>, <processing>, <read> or any
other future extension.
11.1.7. The <status> Element
The <status> element is mandatory and carries the result of the
disposition request in the <disposition> element. For disposition
type <delivery>, it can carry one of the sub-elements <delivered>,
<failed>, <forbidden> or <error>. For disposition type <read>, it
can carry one of the sub-elements <read>, <forbidden> or <error>.
For disposition type <processing>, it can carry one of the sub-
elements <processed>, <stored>, <forbidden> or <error>. <forbidden>
means the disposition was denied. <error> means internal server
error. It can also carry any other future extension.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
11.1.8. The <note> Element
The <note> element is optional and carries a human readable text. It
has the "lang" attribute that indicates the language the text is
written in.
11.2. MIME Type for IMDN Paylaod
The MIME type for the IMDN Payload is "message/imdn+xml". The IMDN
MUST identify the payload as MIME type "message/imdn+xml" in the
Content-type header field.
11.3. The RelaxNG Schema
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<grammar
xmlns="http://relaxng.org/ns/structure/1.0"
xmlns:a="http://relaxng.org/ns/compatibility/annotations/1.0"
datatypeLibrary="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-datatypes"
ns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:imdn">
<start>
<element name="imdn">
<element name="message-id">
<data type="token"/>
</element>
<element name="datetime">
<data type="string"/>
</element>
<optional>
<element name="recipient-uri">
<data type="anyURI"/>
</element>
<element name="original-recipient-uri">
<data type="anyURI"/>
</element>
<element name="subject">
<data type="string"/>
</element>
</optional>
<choice>
<ref name="deliveryNotification"/>
<ref name="readNotification"/>
<ref name="processingNotification"/>
<zeroOrMore>
<empty/>
</zeroOrMore>
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
</choice>
<ref name="note"/>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="Extension"/>
</zeroOrMore>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="anyIMDN"/>
</zeroOrMore>
</element>
</start>
<define name="deliveryNotification">
<element name="disposition">
<element name="delivery">
<empty/>
</element>
</element>
<element name="status">
<choice>
<element name="delivered">
<empty/>
</element>
<element name="failed">
<empty/>
</element>
<ref name="commonDispositionStatus"></ref>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="Extension"/>
</zeroOrMore>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="anyIMDN"/>
</zeroOrMore>
</choice>
</element>
</define>
<define name="readNotification">
<element name="disposition">
<element name="read">
<empty/>
</element>
</element>
<element name="status">
<choice>
<element name="read">
<empty/>
</element>
<ref name="commonDispositionStatus"></ref>
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="Extension"/>
</zeroOrMore>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="anyIMDN"/>
</zeroOrMore>
</choice>
</element>
</define>
<define name="processingNotification">
<element name="disposition">
<element name="processing">
<empty/>
</element>
</element>
<element name="status">
<choice>
<element name="processed">
<empty/>
</element>
<element name="stored">
<empty/>
</element>
<ref name="commonDispositionStatus"></ref>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="Extension"/>
</zeroOrMore>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="anyIMDN"/>
</zeroOrMore>
</choice>
</element>
</define>
<define name="commonDispositionStatus">
<choice>
<element name="forbidden">
<empty/>
</element>
<element name="error">
<empty/>
</element>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="Extension"/>
</zeroOrMore>
<zeroOrMore>
<ref name="anyIMDN"/>
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
</zeroOrMore>
</choice>
</define>
<define name="note">
<element name="note">
<optional>
<attribute>
<name ns="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace">lang</name>
<data type="language"/>
</attribute>
</optional>
<data type="string"/>
</element>
</define>
<define name="Extension">
<empty/>
</define>
<define name="anyIMDN">
<element>
<anyName>
<except>
<nsName ns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:imdn"/>
<nsName ns=""/>
</except>
</anyName>
<mixed>
<zeroOrMore>
<choice>
<attribute>
<anyName/>
</attribute>
<ref name="anyIMDN"/>
</choice>
</zeroOrMore>
</mixed>
</element>
</define>
</grammar>
12. Transporting Messages using SIP
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
12.1. Endpoint Behaviour
12.1.1. Sending Requests
A SIP MESSAGE request is constructed using RFC 3428 [10]. The
Content-type header field indicates the MIME type of the request
payload. When using this extension, the Content-type header field
MUST be of MIME type "message/cpim" [2] for both IMs and IMDNs. The
payload is constructed according to Section 7.
A SIP MESSAGE request to multiple recipients is constructed in a
similar manner as a SIP MESSAGE request to a single recipient. The
differences are indicated in [15].
12.1.2. Sending Responses
An endpoint receiving a SIP MESSAGE request constructs a SIP response
according to RFC3428 [10]. Of course, an endpoint will send a
response to the MESSAGE request regardless of they type of message
(IM or IMDN) is has received, or the disposition type it has been
asked for.
12.1.3. Receiving Requests
12.1.3.1. Instant Message
A SIP MESSAGE request is identified as an IM by examining its
contents according to Section 9.
If an IM Recipient received a SIP MESSAGE request that is an IM that
requested a positive-delivery notification, and that IM Recipient has
constructed and sent a SIP 2xx class response, it MAY generate a
positive-delivery notification after making sure that the IM has been
delivered to the user or application (a GW, for example, can generate
a 2xx response before it has been guaranteed that the final recipient
has actually received the IM). The positive-delivery notification is
constructed according to Section 7.2.1.1. The message is then placed
as the payload in a SIP MESSAGE request.
If an IM Recipient received a SIP MESSAGE request that is an IM that
requested a negative-delivery, and that IM Recipient has constructed
and sent a 2xx class response, it SHOULD generate a negative-delivery
notification if it learnt that the final recipient or application did
not receive the IM (a GW, for example, can generate a 2xx response
before it has been guaranteed that the final recipient has actually
received the IM). The negative-delivery notification is constructed
according to Section 7.2.1.1. The message is then placed as the
payload in a SIP MESSAGE request.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
If an IM Recipient received a SIP MESSAGE request that is an IM that
requested a negative-delivery notification, and the IM Recipient has
constructed and sent an error response, it MUST NOT generate a
negative-delivery notification.
If an IM Recipient received a SIP MESSAGE request that is an IM that
requested a read notification, and that IM Recipient has constructed
and sent a SIP 2xx class response, it MAY generate a read
notification after making sure that the IM has been presented to the
user or application. It is outside the scope of this document how
such determination can be made. Note that the option to send a read
notification or not can be left to the user. An application may
allow a user to configure such choice. The read notification is
constructed according to Section 7.2.1.2. The message is then placed
as the payload in a SIP MESSAGE request.
12.1.3.2. Delivery Notification
A SIP MESSAGE request is identified as delivery notification by
examining its contents according to Section 9.
12.1.3.3. Read Notification
A SIP MESSAGE request is identified as read notification by examining
its contents according to Section 9.
12.2. Intermediary Behaviour
In this context, application servers (including URI-List servers and
Store-and-Forward server) and gateways are defined as intermediaries.
SIP Proxies MUST NOT generate IMDNs but MUST forward them like any
other sip request.
A SIP MESSAGE request to multiple recipients is forwarded according
to [15].
If an intermediary generates a SIP 2xx class response to a SIP
MESSAGE request it has received that is an IM, it examines if the
body was of type "message/cpim". If so, it checks if there is the
header field Disposition-Notification with a value "positive-
delivery" and/or "negative-delivery". If so, it MUST send a delivery
notification after receiving a transactional final response for the
IM.
If the Disposition-Notification header field contains a value of
"positive-delivery", the intermediary MUST NOT generate a delivery
notification if it receives a SIP 2xx class response for the sent IM.
This is in anticipation of a failure downstream after a 2xx response
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
has been generated.
If the Disposition-Notification header field contains a value of
"negative-delivery", the intermediary SHOULD generate a delivery
notification if it receives a SIP 4xx, 5xx or 6xx class final
response for the sent IM or if it has received a SIP 2xx class
response followed by a negative-delivery notification.
If the Disposition-Notification header field contains a value of
"processing", the intermediary MAY generate a processing notification
after it has forwarded or stored the IM. The rest of the procedures
in Section 8.1 apply.
The procedure for generating such IMDN is the same as that of an IM
Recipient (Section 7.2.1.1).
The <recipient-uri> element of the XML body is populated with the URI
of the IM Recipient.
If an intermediary receives a SIP MESSAGE request carrying a positive
delivery notification or a read notification, it forwards it using
the rules in Section 8.
13. Transporting Messages using MSRP
13.1. Endpoint Behaviour
13.1.1. Sending Requests
MSRP Relays MUST NOT generate IMDNs.
An MSRP SEND request is constructed using [11]. The content-type
header field indicates the MIME type of the request payload. When
using this extension, the content-type header field MUST be of MIME
type "message/cpim" [2] for both IMs and IMDNs. The payload is
constructed according to Section 7.
MSRP has built in delivery reports and therefore does not require
delivery notifications as defined in this specification. Read
notifications and any future defined IMDN dispositions, however, are
still relevant. Therefore, an IM Sender MUST NOT create MSRP SEND
requests requiring a positive-delivery notification or a negative-
delivery notification.
For SEND requests that are IMDNs, the IM Recipient MUST NOT request a
delivery report (an MSRP REPORT to a SEND request). I.e. It MUST
populate the request with a Failure-Report header field with the
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
value "no" and with a Success-Report header field with value "no" (or
alternatively leave out that header field since it defaults to "no").
The IM Recipient also MUST NOT request an IMDN for a SEND request
that is an IMDN.
An MSRP SEND request to multiple recipients is constructed in a
similar manner as a SEND request to a single recipient. The
differences are indicated in [14].
13.1.2. Sending Responses
An endpoint receiving an MSRP SEND request constructs an MSRP
response according to [11] if needed. Section 7.2 of [11] describes
when to send and when not to send an MSRP response. For SEND
requests that are IMDNs, a response MUST NOT be generated. This is
not a special case; for SEND requests that contain a Failure-Report
header field with the value "no" and a Success-Report header field
with value "no" the IM Sender does not need to start a timer and the
IM Recipient does not send a transactional response.
13.1.3. Receiving Requests
13.1.3.1. Instant Message
An MSRP SEND request is identified as an IM by examining its contents
according to Section 9.
13.1.3.2. Read Report
An MSRP SEND request is identified as read notification by examining
its contents according to Section 9. The IM Sender MUST ignore any
requests for read notification, or any kind of IMDNs for an IMDN.
13.2. Intermediary Behaviour
In this context, application servers (including conference servers
and Store-and-Forward server) and gateways are defined as
intermediaries. MSRP Relays MUST NOT generate IMDNs but MUST relay
them.
An MSRP SEND request to multiple recipients is forwarded according to
[14].
MSRP has built in delivery reports and therefore does not require
delivery notifications as defined in this specification. An MSRP
intermediary MUST NOT generate IMDNs. A Store-and-Forwards server
(the equivalent of a voice-mail server) can send stored session IMs
to their destination and forward the request for read notifications,
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 27]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
if any. The read notification most likely has to be an aggregated
read notification for all the IMs that were stored for that session,
and the aggregation has to be done at the IM Recipient. It is
unknown at this point how a MSRP store-and-forward server
communicates with the recipient in order to send the IMs. This is
outside the scope of this document and is left as a future exercise.
14. Security Considerations
IMDNs provide a fine-grained view of the activity of the IM Recipient
and thus deserves particularly careful confidentiality protection so
that only the intended recipient of the IMDN will receive the IMDN
(in most cases, the intended recipient of the IMDN is the IM Sender).
Since IMDNs are carried by using the IM protocol itself, all security
considerations of the underlying IM protocol also apply to the IMDNs.
The threats in the IMDN system, over and beyond the threats inherent
to IM include the following:
o A malicious endpoint attempts to send messages to a user that
would normally not wish to receive messages from that endpoint by
convincing the IMDN system to "bounce" an IMDN from an
unsuspecting endpoint to the user.
o A malicious endpoint attempts to flood a IM Sender with IMDNs by
convincing a URI-List server to send IMDNs to an unsuspecting IM
Sender.
o A malicious node in the network that attempts to modify an IMDN
from a IM Recipient.
o A malicious intermediary attempts to forward an IMDN from an IM
Recipient to the IM Sender, where the IM Recipient would not
normally forward the IMDN to that IM Sender if the IM Recipient
knew the identity of the IM Sender.
o A malicious endpoint that attempts to fish for a Request-URI of an
endpoint beyond an intermediary , where the endpoint would
normally wish to keep its identity private from the malicious
endpoint.
o A malicious node in the network that attempts to eavesdrop on IMDN
traffic to, for example, learn Request-URI or traffic pattern
information.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 28]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
o A malicious node in the network attempts to stage a denial of
service attack on an intermediary by requesting a large list
expansion with a request for aggregated IMDN processing.
The protocol cannot protect against attacks that include the
following:
o A malicious intermediary directly revealing the identity of a
downstream endpoint that would not normally wish its identity
revealed. Keeping such information private is an intermediary
implementation issue.
o A malicious IM Recipient that alters the time of the IMDN. There
is no protocol mechanism for ensuring the IM Recipient does not
lie about the time or purposely holds an IMDN for transmission to
make it appear that the user read an IM later than they actually
did.
o A deletion attack on an IMDN. This is a trade-off between privacy
and security. The privacy considerations allow the IM Recipient
to silently ignore an IMDN request. Any mechanism that would
reliably indicate that a malicious node deleted a IM Recipient's
IMDN would also serve the purpose of detecting a IM Recipient that
chose not to issue an IMDN.
To combat eavesdropping, modification, and man-in-the-middle attacks,
we require some level of authentication and integrity protections.
That said, there are circumstances where strong integrity would be
overkill. The presumption is the IM Sender has and sets the
expectation for the level of protection. The procedures for
integrity protection are as follows.
o If the IM Recipient has a certificate, it MUST sign the IMDN.
o If the IM is encrypted, the IM Recipient or intermediary MUST
encrypt the IMDN body, as an attacker may attempt to discern the
user's activity profile and identity from sniffing IMDNs on the
network.
o The two above rules are cumulative.
The IM Recipient or intermediary MUST be capable of loading a user
certificate.
An attacker can mount a distributed denial of service attack on a
node by sending lots of IMs to the node with IMDN requests. Note
that this is the same problem as there is without IMDN; IMDN simply
linearly increases the load on the node under attack. One can
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 29]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
mitigate, but not eliminate this threat by the endpoint immediately
ignoring requests that are not authenticated.
Likewise, an attacker can mount a denial of service attack on an
intermediary by asking the intermediary to explode a large list and
to direct the intermediary to aggregate the IMDNs from the targets of
the list.
The following security considerations apply when using IMDNs:
14.1. Forgery
IMs can be forged. To protect against that, an IM can be signed. An
intermediary that receives a signed message and needs to modify any
part of it that is included in the signature (like adding an
Original-To header to the CPIM headers), MUST consume the IM and
create a new copy of it that the intermediary signs itself.
IMDNs may be forged as easily as ordinary IMs. Endpoints and
intermediaries that wish to make automatic use of IMDNs should take
appropriate precautions to minimize the potential damage from denial-
of-service attacks. Security threats related to forged IMDNs include
the sending of a falsified IMDN when the indicated disposition of the
IM has not actually occurred. For example, read notification could
be forged to indicate that a IM Recipient has read the IM.
Unsolicited IMDNs is also another form of forgery.
14.2. Confidentiality
There may be cases where an IM Recipient does not wish to reveal the
information that he has received or in fact read the IM. In this
situation, it is acceptable for the IM Recipient to silently ignore
requests for an IMDN. It is strongly RECOMMENDED that the IM
Recipient obtain the user's consent before sending an IMDN.
Circumstances where the IM Recipient does not ask for the user's
consent include IM systems that, for regulatory reasons, are required
to issue an IMDN, such as in the health care field or financial
community.
An IM Recipient can obtain such consent by a prompt or dialog box on
a per-IM basis, globally through the user's setting of a preference,
or other, user-configurable mechanism. The user might also indicate
globally that IMDNs are never to be sent or that a "forbidden" IMDN
status is always sent in response to a request for an IMDN.
There are situations where a user sends an IM and requests IMDNs to a
list who's member information is not disclosed. In this situation,
the user will learn of the list members. Therefore, in this case,
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 30]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
the URI-List server MUST remove any information about list members.
If the number of members in the list is also not disclosed, the URL-
List server MUST only deliver one aggregated IMDN. Alternatively,
the URI-list server MAY reject the IM.
An unencrypted IMDN could reveal confidential information about an
encrypted IM. It is a MUST that the same level of security applied
to an IM to be applied to its IMDNs. For example, if an IM is signed
and encrypted, and IMDN must also be signed and encrypted.
14.3. Non-Repudiation
IMDNs cannot be relied on as a guarantee that an IM was or was not
seen by the user. Even if IMDNs are not actively forged, they may be
lost in transit. The IMDN issuing mechanism may be bypassed in some
manner by the IM Recipient.
15. IANA Considerations
15.1. message/imdn+xml MIME TYPE
This document registers a new MIME type "message/imdn+xml", and
registers a new XML namespace.
This specification follows the guidelines of RFC3023 [6].
MIME media type: message
MIME subtype name: imdn+xml
Mandatory parameters: none
Optional parameters: Same as charset parameter application/xml as
specified in RFC 3023 [6].
Encoding considerations: Same as encoding considerations of
application/xml as specified in RFC 3023 [6].
Security considerations: See section 10 of RFC 3023 [6] and
Section 14 of this document.
Interoperability considerations: none.
Published specification: This document.
Applications which use this media type: This document type is used to
support SIP and MSRP based instant messaging.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 31]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
Additional information: None
Magic number: None
File extension: .cl or .xml
Macintosh file type code: "TEXT"
Personal and email address for further information: Hisham Khartabil
(hisham.khartabil@telio.no)
Intended Usage: COMMON
Author/change controller: The IETF .
15.2. URN Sub-Namespace Registration for urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:imdn
This section registers a new XML namespace, as per guidelines in the
IETF XML Registry [3].
URI: The URI for this namespace is urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:imdn.
Registrant Contact: IETF, SIMPLE working group, Hisham Khartabil
(hisham.khartabil@telio.no) .
15.3. Schema Registration
This section registers a new XML schema per the procedures in [3].
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:imdn
Registrant Contact: IETF, SIMPLE working group, Hisham Khartabil
(hisham.khartabil@telio.no)
The XML for this schema can be found as the sole content of
Section 11.3.
15.4. Message/CPIM Header Field registration
This document registers the following message/cpim header fields in
the cpim-headers registry:
Disposition-Notification - [RFCXXXX]
Message-ID - [RFCXXXX]
Original-To - [RFCXXXX]
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 32]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
IMDN-Record-Route - [RFCXXXX]
IMDN-Route - [RFCXXXX].
15.5. Content-Disposition: notification
This document registers one new Content-Disposition header
"disposition-types": notification. The authors request that this
values be recorded in the IANA registry for Content-Dispositions.
Descriptions of this "disposition-types", including motivation and
examples, are given in Section 7.2.1.1 and Section 9. Short
descriptions suitable for the IANA registry are: notification the
body of the message is a notification according to an earlier request
for a disposition notification to an instant message
16. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Paul Kyzivat, Ben Campbell, Adam
Roach, Gonzalo Camarillo, Sean Olson, Eva Leppanen, Miguel Garcia and
Eric McMurry for their comments and support.
17. References
17.1. Normative References
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[2] Klyne, G. and D. Atkins, "Common Presence and Instant Messaging
(CPIM): Message Format", RFC 3862, August 2004.
[3] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", RFC 3688, January 2004.
[4] Moats, R., "The URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997.
[5] Moats, R., "The URN Namespace for IETF Documents", RFC 2648,
August 1999.
[6] Murata, M., "XML Media Types", RFC 3023, March 1997.
[7] Bray, T., "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second
Edition)", W3C CR CR-xml11-20011006, October 2000.
[8] Ramsdell, B., "S/MIME Version 3 Message Specification",
RFC 2633, June 1999.
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 33]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
17.2. Informative References
[9] Rosenberg et al., J., Shulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E. Schooler,
"SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002.
[10] Campbell, B., "SIP Extension for Instant Messaging", RFC 3428,
December 2002.
[11] Campbell, B., "The Message Session Relay Protocol",
draft-ietf-simple-message-sessions-15, June 2006.
[12] Klensin, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 2821,
April 2001.
[13] Fajman, R., "An Extensible Message Format for Message
Disposition Notifications", RFC 2298, March 1998.
[14] Niemi, A., "Multi-part IM Sessions Using MSRP",
draft-niemi-simple-chat-04, February 2006.
[15] Garcia-Martin, M. and G. Camarillo, "Multiple-Recipient MESSAGE
Requests in SIP", draft-ietf-sip-uri-list-message-00.txt,
September 2006.
Authors' Addresses
Eric Burger
Cantata Technology
18 Keewaydin Dr.
Salem, NH 03079-2839
USA
Phone: +1 603 890 7587
Fax: +1 603 457 5944
Email: eburger@cantata.com
Hisham Khartabil
Telio
P.O. Box 1203 Vika
Oslo 0110
Norway
Phone: +47 2167 3544
Email: hisham.khartabil@telio.no
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 34]
Internet-Draft IM Disposition Notification October 2006
Full 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.
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.
Intellectual Property
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.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
Burger & Khartabil Expires April 16, 2007 [Page 35]
