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

Versions: 00 01                                                         
WEBDAV Working Group                              Surendra Reddy(Oracle)
Internet Draft                                 Mark Leighton Fisher(TCE)
draft-ietf-webdav-enpreq-01.txt                              May 1, 1998
Expires November 1, 1998


              Requirements for Event Notification Protocol


Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working
   documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas,
   and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or made obsolete 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".

   To view the entire list of current Internet-Drafts, please check the
   "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
   Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), ftp.nordu.net (Northern
   Europe), ftp.nis.garr.it (Southern Europe), munnari.oz.au (Pacific
   Rim), ftp.ietf.org (US East Coast), or ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast).

   Distribution of this document is unlimited. Please send comments to
   the Distributed Authoring and Versioning (WEBDAV) working group at
   <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>, which may be joined by sending a message with
   subject "subscribe" to <w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org>.

   Discussions of the WEBDAV working group are archived at
   <URL:http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Archives/Public/w3c-dist-auth>.
Abstract

   This document describes the requirements for an Event Notification
   Protocol.  The objective is to provide a simple, scalable and highly
   efficient notification protocol while also providing the appropriate
   flexibility to meet the needs of both the Internet and enterprise
   environments. Intent of this document is to collect all notification
   requirements in one place and leverage the work already done in other
   working groups.

   This document is one of a set of documents which together describe
   all aspects of a new Event Notification Protocol (ENP). ENP is an
   application level protocol that can be used for distributed event
   notification. The full set of ENP documents include:



S.Reddy et al.                                                  [Page 1]


draft-ietf-webdav-enpreq-01.txt                              May 1, 1998


      (1). Requirements for Event Notification Protocol

      (2). Model and Semantics Event Notification Protocol

      (3). Protocol Specification for Event Notification Protocol

      (4). Rationale for the Structure and Model for the Event
           Notification Protocol



1.  Introduction

    In a distributed environment, there will be operations thant take so
    long that the user doesn't want to wait till the completion of the
    event. For example, in a distributed authoring and versioning
    environment, user may want to monitor the changes performed on vari-
    ous resources created or owned by the user. Similarly, if a  report
    generation event takes significant amount of time to complete the
    event, user can choose to be notified when the event completes
    rather than constantly polling or waiting for the event to complete.

    Similarly, if any search operation takes more time in executing the
    search, client can register the event with the server so that sever
    notifies the client when the search is done. These requirements man-
    date the need for a mechanism to notify events to subscribed users.

    There are several different network event notification protocols
    like CORBA Event Services, X Window System events, SGAP, BSCW, etc.
    But these services are defined to work with specific architectures
    and impose large codebases which makes them in practice difficult to
    use them in lightweight notification services.

    This document presents a list of features in the form of require-
    ments for a Event Notification Protocol which, if implemented, would
    improve the efficiency of common event notification mechanisms.


2.  Terminology

Events Supplier
    Events Supplier generates event data.

Events Consumer
    Events Consumer process event data.

Push Model
    In the Push model, Event Notification Protocol push event data to



S.Reddy et al.                                                  [Page 2]


draft-ietf-webdav-enpreq-01.txt                              May 1, 1998


    consumers.

Pull Model
    In Pull model, consumers pull event data from Event Notification
    Protocol.



3.  Event Notification Protocol

3.1.  Overview
      Event Notification Protocol decouples the communication between
      communicating processes or events. The event notification protocol
      defines two roles for the events: the supplier roles and the con-
      sumer role. Suppliers produce event data and consumers process
      event data. Event data are communicated between suppliers and con-
      sumers through the Event Notification Protocol(ENP).  Event Notif-
      ication Protocol can be initiated by either the push or pull model
      in ENP. The push model allows a supplier of events to initiate the
      transfer of the event data to consumers. The pull model allows a
      consumer of events to request the event data from a supplier. In
      the push model, the supplier is taking the initiative; in the pull
      model, the consumer is taking the initiative.

      The consumer MAY use either a blocking or non-blocking mechanism
      for receiving notifications. The consumer can periodically poll
      the channel for events.

3.2.  Examples
      (1). The Event Notification Protocol can be used to generate
      change triggers.  When a resource's properties or contents are
      changed, ENP generates events and propagates these events all sub-
      scribed parties.

      (2). Collections may be composed of internal and external members.
      Document authors are interested in knowing when the value of cer-
      tain properties or the contents of these members have changed.
      Event Notification Protocol can be used to send notifications of
      all such changes to all subscribed parties and document authors.


4.  Requirements

4.1.  Notification Registration
      It SHOULD be possible for end users to "register" for notifica-
      tions of certain types of events.





S.Reddy et al.                                                  [Page 3]


draft-ietf-webdav-enpreq-01.txt                              May 1, 1998


4.2.  Notification Attributes
      It SHOULD be possible to associate attributes with the notifica-
      tion request.

4.3.  Queued Notification
      Notifications which are not necessarily sent immediately, but are
      queued for delivery for some intermediate network process or for
      later retrieval. Queued notifications SHOULD be supported.

4.4.  Notification with Reliable Delivery
      It SHOULD be possible to deliver event notifications in a reliable
      manner, assuring fully ordered end-to-end delivery.  Guaranteed
      delivery requires both queued notification and a reliable tran-
      sport.

4.5.  Notifications with Unreliable Delivery
      Notifications are delivered via the fundamental transport address
      and routing framework, but no acknowledgement or retry is
      required. Process to process communications, if involved, are
      unconstrained.

4.6.  Quality of Service
      Some notification delivery methods may allow users to select qual-
      ity of service parameters. These parameters will depend upon the
      specific delivery method chosen and may include parameters such as
      priority, security, number of retries, and the like.

4.7.  Consumers MUST be able specify zero or more notification(s).
      recipients when submitting a request for event notification. When
      specifying a notification recipient, consumers MUST be able to
      specify notification delivery method, associated attributes and
      any other quality of service parameters for the notification reci-
      pient.

4.8.  It SHOULD be possible to deliver an event notification
      through firewalls. However, guaranteed delivery of the notifica-
      tion through a firewall need not be tested before accepting the
      event registration request.

4.9.  A mechanism MUST be provided for delivering notification to
      the submitting client when the delivery of an event notification
      to a specified Notification recipient fails.

4.10.  Events exist in a distributed environment. Consumers SHOULD be
      able either request events(Subscription Model) or be notified of
      events without subscribing(Broadcast Model), whichever is more
      appropriate for application design and performance.




S.Reddy et al.                                                  [Page 4]


draft-ietf-webdav-enpreq-01.txt                              May 1, 1998


4.11.  A supplier MAY issue a single request to communicate event
      data to all consumers at once.

4.12.  Supplier MAY generate events without knowing the identities
      of consumers. Conversely, consumers MAY receive events without
      knowing the identities of the suppliers

4.13.  Complex events may be handled by constructing tree of events
      consumers/suppliers checking for successively more specific event
      predicates.

4.14.  Consumers and suppliers SHOULD be able to register with event
      channels.

4.15.  It SHOULD be possible to support event filtering through
      which event channels deliver events selectively from suppliers to
      consumers.

4.16.  Some applications may require that consumers of an event
      provide an explicit confirmation of reception back to the sup-
      plier.

4.17.  It SHOULD be possible to consume events from one or more
      suppliers and supplies events to one or more consumers.

4.18.  Some applications may require that consumers of an event provide
      an explicit confirmation of reception back to the supplier. Event
      Notification Protocol SHOULD be able to support this functionality
      effectively using event attributes.


5.  Extensibility
    The Event Notification Protocol SHALL be extensible to facilitate
    interoperability and prevent implementation collisions.

6.  Security Requirements

6.1.  It SHOULD be possible to digitally sign the notifications to
      ensure the authenticity and integrity of the notifications.

6.2.  It SHOULD be possible for the Event Notification Protocol to
      operate within a secure environment. Wherever possible ENP SHOULD
      be able to make use of existing security protocols and services.
      ENP SHOULD NOT invent new security protocols or services if the
      requirements described in this document can be met by existing
      protocols and services.





S.Reddy et al.                                                  [Page 5]


draft-ietf-webdav-enpreq-01.txt                              May 1, 1998


6.3.  ENP SHOULD support support event registration and
      notification from one enterprise to another through firewalls.
      ENP MUST be capable of passing through firewalls and/or proxy
      servers(where enabled by the firewall administrator) preferably
      without any modifications to the existing firewall technology.

7.  Internationalization

7.1.  As consumer and producers of events come from all over the
      world, Event Notification Protocol SHOULD meet internationaliza-
      tion and localization requirements. Because of these requirements,
      ENP SHOULD use UTF-8[RFC2044] as its native character set.

8.  References

[1]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
     Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997

[2]  Fielding, R., Gettys, J., Mogul, J., Frystyk, H., and Berners-Lee,
     T., "Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", RFC 2068, January
     1997

[3]  Postel, Jonathon B., "SIMPLE MAIL TRANSFER PROTOCOL", RFC 821,
     August 1982

[4]  Postel, J., and Reynolds, J., "FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL (FTP)", RFC
     959, October 1985

[5]  Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character Sets and Languages", RFC
     2277, January 1998.

[6]  Y. Y. Goland, E. J. Whitehead, Jr., A. Faizi, S. R. Carter, D. Jen-
     sen, "Extensions for Distributed Authoring on the World Wide Web -
     WebDAV.", Draft-ietf-webdav- protocol-08.txt, April 7, 1998.



9.  Author's Address


   Surendra Reddy
   Oracle Corporation
   500 Oracle Parkway
   M/S 6op3
   Redwoodshores, CA 94065
   Phone:  +1(650) 506 5441
   Fax:    +1(650) 654 6205
   Email:  skreddy@us.oracle.com



S.Reddy et al.                                                  [Page 6]


draft-ietf-webdav-enpreq-01.txt                              May 1, 1998


   Mark Leighton Fisher
   Thomson Consumer Electronics
   Indianapolis, IN
   email: fisherm@indy.tce.com

   Expires November 1, 1998













































S.Reddy et al.                                                  [Page 7]