Network Working Group P. Saint-Andre
Internet-Draft JSF
Expires: February 9, 2006 A. Houri
IBM
J. Hildebrand
Jabber, Inc.
August 8, 2005
Basic Messaging and Presence Interoperability between the Extensible
Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) and Session Initiation Protocol
(SIP) for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (SIMPLE)
draft-saintandre-xmpp-simple-05
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 February 9, 2006.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract
This document defines a bi-directional protocol mapping for use by
gateways that enable the exchange of presence information and single
instant messages between systems that implement the Extensible
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) and those that implement the
basic extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for instant
messaging and presence.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Architectural Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 XMPP to SIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 SIP to XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3. Instant Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2 XMPP to SIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3 SIP to XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4. Presence Subscriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.2 XMPP to SIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.3 SIP to XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
5. Presence Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2 XMPP to SIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.3 SIP to XMPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
8.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
8.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 27
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
1. Introduction
In order to help ensure interoperability between instant messaging
and presence systems that conform to the requirements of RFC 2779
[IMP-REQS], it is important to clearly define mappings between such
protocols. Within the IETF, work has proceeded on two such
protocols:
o Various extensions to the Session Initiation Protocol ([SIP]) for
instant messaging and presence, as developed within the SIP for
Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (SIMPLE)
Working Group
o The Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP), which
consists of a formalization of the core XML streaming protocols
developed originally by the Jabber open-source community
One approach to helping ensure interoperability between such
protocols is to map each protocol to the abstract semantics described
in [CPIM] and [CPP]; that is the approach taken by [SIMPLE-CPIM] and
[XMPP-CPIM]. The approach taken in this document is to directly map
semantics from one protocol to another (i.e., from SIP/SIMPLE to XMPP
and vice-versa), mainly for use by gateways between systems that
implement one or the other of these protocols.
The mappings specified in this document cover four areas that address
basic instant messaging and presence functionality:
o Mapping of addresses
o Mapping of single instant messages
o Mapping of presence subscriptions
o Mapping of presence notifications
Mapping of more advanced functionality (e.g., messaging sessions
rather than single messages) is out of scope for this document;
however, the authors will attempt to address such issues in future
documents.
1.1 Architectural Assumptions
This document assumes that the mapping between protocols will most
likely occur by means of a gateway between an XMPP network and a SIP
network being used for instant messaging and presence. Such a
gateway is a dedicated translator between the XMPP and SIP/SIMPLE
protocols. Although such a gateway could use the [CPIM] and [CPP]
specifications to define the common formats into which the protocols
are translated for purposes of interworking (as specified in [SIMPLE-
CPIM] and [XMPP-CPIM]), this document assumes that a gateway will
translate directly from one protocol to the other. Naturally, a
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
gateway need not be a distinct entity on the network and may be co-
resident with an XMPP server or a SIMPLE "server" (although there is
no such thing as a SIMPLE server per se, we use the term here to
refer to a SIP proxy, redirect, or registrar server that supports the
SIP extensions for instant messaging and/or presence). Within this
document, we refer to a gateway from an XMPP network to a SIP network
being used for instant messaging and presence as an "XMPP-SIMPLE
gateway" and we refer to a gateway from a SIP network being used for
instant messaging and presence to an XMPP network as a "SIMPLE-XMPP
gateway".
1.2 Terminology
The capitalized key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL",
"SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT
RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be
interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [TERMS].
2. Addresses
2.1 Overview
The address formats used to identify XMPP entities are different from
those used to identify SIP entities. The XMPP address format is
specified in [XMPP-CORE]; as specified in [XMPP-IM], instant
messaging and presence applications of XMPP must also support 'im:'
and 'pres:' URIs as specified in [CPIM] and [CPP] respectively,
although such support may simply involve leaving resolution of such
addresses up to an XMPP server. The SIP address format for instant
messaging is specified in [SIP-IM]; it may use either 'sip:' or
'sips:' URIs as specified in [SIP] or an 'im:' URI as specified in
[CPIM]. The SIP address format for presence is specified in [SIP-
PRES]; it may use either 'sip:' or 'sips:' URIs as specified in [SIP]
or a 'pres:' URI as specified in [CPP].
In this document we describe mappings for addresses of the form
<user@domain> only, ignoring any protocol-specific extensions such as
XMPP resource identifiers or SIP telephone numbers and passwords. In
addition, we have ruled the mapping of domain names as out of scope
for now since that is a matter for the Domain Name System;
specifically, the issue for interworking between SIP and XMPP relates
to the translation of fully internationalized domain names (which the
SIP address format does not allow, but which the XMPP address format
does allow via [IDNA]) into non-internationalized domain names.
Therefore, in the following sections we discuss local-part addresses
only (these are called variously "usernames", "instant inboxes",
"presentities", and "node identifiers" in the protocols at issue).
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
The sip:/sips:, im:/pres:, and XMPP address schemes allow different
sets of characters (although all three allow alphanumeric characters
and disallow both spaces and control characters). In some cases,
characters allowed in one scheme are forbidden in others; these
characters must be mapped appropriately in order to ensure
interoperable communications across systems.
The local-part address in sip:/sips: URIs inherits from the
"userinfo" rule in [RFC2396] with several changes; here we discuss
the SIP "user" rule only:
user = 1*( unreserved / escaped / user-unreserved )
user-unreserved = "&" / "=" / "+" / "$" / "," / ";" / "?" / "/"
unreserved = alphanum / mark
mark = "-" / "_" / "." / "!" / "~" / "*" / "'"
/ "(" / ")"
The local-part address in im:/pres: URIs inherits from the "local-
part" rule in [RFC822]:
local-part = word *("." word)
word = atom / quoted-string
atom = 1*<any CHAR except specials, SPACE and CTLs>
CHAR = <any ASCII character>
specials = "(" / ")" / "<" / ">" / "@" / "," / ";"
/ ":" / "\" / <"> / "." / "[" / "]"
The local-part address in XMPP addresses allows any US-ASCII
character except space, controls, and the " & ' / : < > @ characters.
Therefore, following table lists the allowed and forbidden characters
in the local-part addresses of each protocol (aside from the
alphanumeric, space, and control characters):
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Table 1: Allowed and forbidden characters (view #1)
+----------+--------------+--------------+
| TYPE | ALLOWED | FORBIDDEN |
+----------+--------------+--------------+
| SIP/SIPS | ! $ & ' ( ) | " # % / : < |
| | * + , - . / | > @ [ \ ] ^ |
| | ; = ? _ ~ | ` { | } |
+----------+--------------+--------------+
| IM/PRES | ! # $ % & ' | " ( ) , . : |
| | * + - / = ? | ; < > @ [ \ |
| | ^ _ ` { | } | ] |
| | ~ | |
+----------+--------------+--------------+
| XMPP | ! # $ % ( ) | " & ' / : < |
| | * + , - . ; | > @ |
| | = ? [ \ ] ^ | |
| | _ `{ | } ~ | |
+----------+--------------+--------------+
Now we arrange them in an easier-to-read format, in order by
hexadecimal character number (where the "A" row shows the allowed
characters and the "F" row shows the forbidden characters).
Table 2: Allowed and forbidden characters (view #2)
+---+----------------------------------+
| SIP/SIPS CHARACTERS |
+---+----------------------------------+
| A | ! $ &'()*+,-./ ; = ? _ ~ |
| F | "# % : < > @[\]^ `{|} |
+---+----------------------------------+
| IM/PRES CHARACTERS |
+---+----------------------------------+
| A | ! #$%&' *+ - / = ? ^_`{|}~ |
| F | " () , . :;< > @[\] |
+---+----------------------------------+
| XMPP CHARACTERS |
+---+----------------------------------+
| A | ! #$% ()*+,-. ; = ? [\]^_`{|}~ |
| F | " &' /: < > @ |
+---+----------------------------------+
The following table shows the complement of allowed US-ASCII
characters in each addressing scheme when compared individually to
the other schemes, which we will use in transforming one address
format into another (each cell shows the characters that are allowed
in the row protocol but forbidden in the column protocol).
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Table 3: Partial complements of allowed characters
+----------+----------+-----------+-------+
| | SIP/SIPS | IM/PRES | XMPP |
+----------+----------+-----------+-------+
| SIP/SIPS | N/A | (),.; | &'/ |
+----------+----------+-----------+-------+
| IM/PRES | #%/^`{\} | N/A | &'/ |
+----------+----------+-----------+-------+
| XMPP | #%[\]^` | (),.;[\] | N/A |
| | {|} | | |
+----------+----------+-----------+-------+
In addition to the US-ASCII characters described above, many non-US-
ASCII (specifically, UTF-8) characters are allowed in XMPP addresses
but not allowed in sip:/sips: or im:/pres: URIs, since XMPP allows
internationalized local-part addresses. A straightforward mapping of
these characters to US-ASCII characters is provided in Section 2.2.5
of [URL-GUIDE], namely to encode unsafe octets using percent-encoding
(%hexhex).
2.2 XMPP to SIP
The following is a high-level algorithm for mapping an XMPP address
to a sip:, sips:, im:, or pres: URI:
1. Split XMPP address into node identifier (local-part; mapping
described in remaining steps), domain identifier (hostname;
mapping is out of scope), and resource identifier (specifier for
particular device or connection; discard this for cross-system
interoperability).
2. Apply Nodeprep profile of [STRINGPREP] (as specified in [XMPP-
CORE]) for canonicalization (OPTIONAL).
3. Translate "\26" to "&", "\27" to "'", and "\2f" to "/"
respectively (this is consistent with [JEP-0106]).
4. Determine if the foreign domain supports im: and pres: URIs
(discovered via [SRV] lookup as specified in [XMPP-IM]), else
assume that the foreign domain supports sip:/sips: URIs.
5. If converting into im: or pres: URI, for each byte, if the byte
is in the set (),.;[\] (i.e., the partial complement from Row 3,
Column 2 of Table 3 above) then transform that byte to %hexhex.
If converting into sip: or sips: URI, for each byte, if the byte
is in the set #%[\]^`{|} (i.e., the partial complement from Row
3, Column 1 of Table 3 above) then transform that byte to
%hexhex.
6. Combine resulting local-part with mapped hostname to form
local@domain address.
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
7. Prepend with 'im:' scheme (for XMPP <message/> stanzas) or
'pres:' scheme (for XMPP <presence/> stanzas) if foreign domain
supports these, else prepend with 'sip:' or 'sips:' scheme
according to local service policy.
2.3 SIP to XMPP
The following is a high-level algorithm for mapping a sip:, sips:,
im:, or pres: URI to an XMPP address:
1. Remove URI scheme.
2. Split at the first '@' character into local-part and hostname
(mapping the latter is out of scope).
3. Translate %hexhex to equivalent octets.
4. Treat result as a UTF-8 string.
5. Translate "&" to "\26", "'" to "\27", and "/" to "\2f"
respectively in order to properly handle the characters forbidden
in XMPP addresses but allowed in sip:/sips: URIs and im:/pres:
URIs as shown in Column 3 of Table 3 above (this is consistent
with [JEP-0106]).
6. Apply Nodeprep profile of [STRINGPREP] (as specified in [XMPP-
CORE]) for canonicalization (OPTIONAL).
7. Recombine local-part with mapped hostname to form local@domain
address.
3. Instant Messages
3.1 Overview
Both XMPP and IM-aware SIP systems enable entities (often but not
necessarily human users) to send "instant messages" to other
entities. The term "instant message" usually refers to messages sent
between two entities for delivery in close to real time (rather than
messages that are stored and forwarded to the intended recipient upon
request). Generally there are three kinds of instant message:
o Single messages, which are sent from the sender to the recipient
outside the context of any one-to-one chat session or multi-user
text conference.
o Chat messages, which are sent from the sender to the recipient in
the context of a "messaging session" between the two entities.
o Groupchat messages, which are sent from a sender to multiple
recipients in the context of a text conference (along the lines of
[IRC]).
This document covers single messages only, since they form the
"lowest common denominator" for instant messaging on the Internet.
It is likely that future documents will address chat messages as
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
well, especially once the SIMPLE WG completes its work on one-to-one
messaging sessions (a likely candidate for finalization is [MSRP]).
Instant messaging using XMPP message stanzas of type "normal" is
specified in [XMPP-IM]. Instant messaging using SIP requests of type
MESSAGE (often called "pager-model" messaging) is specified in
[SIP-IM].
As described in [XMPP-IM], a single instant message is an XML
<message/> stanza of type "normal" sent over an XML stream (since
"normal" is the default for the 'type' attribute of the <message/>
stanza, the attribute is often omitted). In this document we will
assume that such a message is sent from an XMPP client to an XMPP
server over an XML stream negotiated between the client and the
server, and that the client is controlled by a human user (this is a
simplifying assumption introduced for explanatory purposes only; the
XMPP sender could be a bot-controlled client, a component such as a
workflow application, a server, etc.). Continuing the tradition of
Shakespeare examples in XMPP documentation, we will say that the XMPP
user has an XMPP address of <juliet@example.com>.
As described in [SIP-IM], a single instant message is a SIP MESSAGE
request sent from a SIP user agent to an intended recipient who is
most generally referenced by an Instant Message URI of the form
<im:user@domain> but who may be referenced by a SIP or SIPS URI of
the form <sip:user@domain> or <sips:user@domain> Here again we
introduce the simplifying assumption that the user agent is
controlled by a human user, whom we shall dub <romeo@example.net>.
3.2 XMPP to SIP
When Juliet wants to send an instant message to Romeo, she interacts
with her XMPP client, which generates an XMPP <message/> stanza. The
syntax of the <message/> stanza, including required and optional
elements and attributes, is defined in [XMPP-IM]. The following is
an example of such a stanza:
Example: XMPP user sends message:
| <message from='juliet@example.com/balcony'
| to='romeo@example.net'>
| <body>Art thou not Romeo, and a Montague?</body>
| </message>
Upon receiving such a stanza, the XMPP server to which Juliet has
connected either delivers it to a local recipient (if the hostname in
the 'to' attribute matches one of the hostnames serviced by the XMPP
server) or attempts to route it to the foreign domain that services
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
the hostname in the 'to' attribute. Naturally, in this document we
assume that the hostname in the 'to' attribute is an IM-aware SIP
service hosted by a separate server. As specified in [XMPP-IM], the
XMPP server needs to determine the identity of the foreign domain,
which it does by performing one or more [SRV] lookups. For message
stanzas, the order of lookups recommended by [XMPP-IM] is to first
try the "_xmpp-server" service as specified in [XMPP-CORE] and to
then try the "_im" service as specified in [IMP-SRV]. Here we assume
that the first lookup will fail but that the second lookup will
succeed and return a resolution "_im._simple.example.net.", since we
have already assumed that the example.net hostname is running a SIP
instant messaging service. (Note: The XMPP server may have
previously determined that the foreign domain is a SIMPLE server, in
which case it would not need to perform the SRV lookups; the caching
of such information is a matter of implementation and local service
policy, and is therefore out of scope for this document.)
Once the XMPP server has determined that the foreign domain is
serviced by a SIMPLE server, it must determine how to proceed. We
here assume that the XMPP server contains or has available to it an
XMPP-SIMPLE gateway. The XMPP server would then deliver the message
stanza to the XMPP-SIMPLE gateway.
The XMPP-SIMPLE gateway is then responsible for translating the XMPP
message stanza into a SIP MESSAGE request from the XMPP user to the
SIP user:
Example: XMPP user sends message (SIP transformation):
| MESSAGE sip:romeo@example.net SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP julietpc.example.com;branch=z9hG4bK776sgdkse
| Max-Forwards: 70
| From: sip:juliet@example.com;tag=49583
| To: sip:romeo@example.net
| Call-ID: Hr0zny9l3@example.com
| CSeq: 1 MESSAGE
| Content-Type: text/plain
| Content-Length: 37
|
| Art thou not Romeo, and a Montague?
The mapping of XMPP syntax elements to SIP syntax elements SHOULD be
as shown in the following table. (Mappings for elements not
mentioned are undefined.)
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Table 3: Message syntax mapping from XMPP to SIP
+-----------------------------+--------------------------+
| XMPP Element or Attribute | SIP Header or Contents |
+-----------------------------+--------------------------+
| <body/> | body of MESSAGE |
| <subject/> | Subject |
| <thread/> | (no mapping) |
| from | From |
| id | (no mapping) |
| to | To |
| type | (no mapping) |
| xml:lang | Content-Language |
+-----------------------------+--------------------------+
3.3 SIP to XMPP
When Romeo wants to send an instant message to Juliet, he interacts
with his SIP user agent, which generates a SIP MESSAGE request. The
syntax of the MESSAGE request is defined in [SIP-IM]. The following
is an example of such a request:
Example: SIP user sends message:
| MESSAGE sip:juliet@example.com SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP romeopc.example.com;branch=eskdgs677Kb4Ghz9
| Max-Forwards: 70
| From: sip:romeo@example.net;tag=38594
| To: sip:juliet@example.com
| Call-ID: M4spr4vdu@example.net
| CSeq: 1 MESSAGE
| Content-Type: text/plain
| Content-Length: 26
|
| Neither, fair saint, if either thee dislike.
Section 5 of [SIP-IM] stipulates that a SIP User Agent presented with
an im: URI should resolve it to a sip: or sips: URI. Therefore we
assume that the To header of a request received by a SIMPLE-XMPP
gateway will contain a sip: or sips: URI. The gateway SHOULD resolve
that address to an im: URI for SIP MESSAGE requests, then follow the
rules in [IMP-SRV] regarding the "_im" SRV service for the target
domain contained in the To header. If SRV address resolution fails
for the "_im" service, the gateway MAY attempt a lookup for the
"_xmpp-server" service as specified in [XMPP-CORE] or MAY return an
error to the sender (the SIP "502 Bad Gateway" error seems most
appropriate). If SRV address resolution succeeds, the gateway is
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
responsible for translating the request into an XMPP message stanza
from the SIP user to the XMPP user and returning a SIP "200 OK"
message to the sender:
Example: SIP user sends message (XMPP transformation):
| <message from='romeo@example.net'
| to='juliet@example.com'>
| <body>Neither, fair saint, if either thee dislike.</body>
| </message>
The mapping of SIP syntax elements to XMPP syntax elements SHOULD be
as shown in the following table. (Mappings for elements not
mentioned in the foregoing table are undefined.)
Table 4: Message syntax mapping from SIP to XMPP
+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| SIP Header or Contents | XMPP Element or Attribute |
+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
| Call-ID | (no mapping) |
| Content-Language | xml:lang |
| CSeq | id (OPTIONAL) |
| From | from |
| Subject | <subject/> |
| To | to |
| body of MESSAGE | <body/> |
+--------------------------+-----------------------------+
Note: When transforming SIP pager-model messages, a SIMPLE-XMPP
gateway SHOULD specify no XMPP 'type' attribute or a 'type' attribute
whose value is "normal".
4. Presence Subscriptions
4.1 Overview
Both XMPP and presence-aware SIP systems enable entities (often but
not necessarily human users) to subscribe to the presence of other
entities. XMPP presence subscriptions are specified in [XMPP-IM].
Presence subscriptions using a SIP event package for presence are
specified in [SIP-PRES].
As described in [XMPP-IM], XMPP presence subscriptions are managed
using XMPP presence stanzas of type "subscribe", "subscribed",
"unsubscribe", and "unsubscribed". The main subscription states are
"none" (neither the user nor the contact is subscribed to the other's
presence information), "from" (the user has a subscription from the
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
contact), "to" (the user has a subscription to the contact's presence
information), and "both" (both user and contact are subscribed to
each other's presence information).
As described in [SIP-PRES], SIP presence subscriptions are managed
through the use of SIP SUBSCRIBE events sent from a SIP user agent to
an intended recipient who is most generally referenced by an Instant
Message URI of the form <pres:user@domain> but who may be referenced
by a SIP or SIPS URI of the form <sip:user@domain> or
<sips:user@domain>.
The subscription models underlying XMPP and SIP are quite different.
For instance, XMPP presence subscriptions are long-lived (indeed
permanent if not explicitly cancelled), whereas SIP presence
subscriptions are short-lived (the default time to live of a SIP
presence subscription is 3600 seconds, as specified in Section 6.4 of
[SIP-PRES]). These differences are addressed below.
4.2 XMPP to SIP
An XMPP user initiates a subscription by sending a subscription
request to another entity (conventionally called a "contact"), which
request the contact either accepts or declines. If the contact
accepts the request, the user will have a subscription to the
contact's presence information until (1) the user unsubscribes or (2)
the contact cancels the subscription. The subscription request is
encapsulated in a presence stanza of type "subscribe":
Example: XMPP user subscribes to SIP contact:
| <presence from='juliet@example.com'
| to='romeo@example.net'
| type='subscribe'/>
Upon receiving such a stanza, the XMPP server to which Juliet has
connected needs to determine the identity of the foreign domain,
which it does by performing one or more [SRV] lookups. For presence
stanzas, the order of lookups recommended by [XMPP-IM] is to first
try the "_xmpp-server" service as specified in [XMPP-CORE] and to
then try the "_pres" service as specified in [IMP-SRV]. Here we
assume that the first lookup will fail but that the second lookup
will succeed and return a resolution "_pres._simple.example.net.",
since we have already assumed that the example.net hostname is
running a SIP presence service.
Once the XMPP server has determined that the foreign domain is
serviced by a SIMPLE server, it must determine how to proceed. We
here assume that the XMPP server contains or has available to it an
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
XMPP-SIMPLE gateway. The XMPP server would then deliver the presence
stanza to the XMPP-SIMPLE gateway.
The XMPP-SIMPLE gateway is then responsible for translating the XMPP
subscription request into a SIP SUBSCRIBE request from the XMPP user
to the SIP user:
Example: XMPP user subscribes to SIP contact (SIP transformation):
| SUBSCRIBE sip:romeo@example.net SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=ffd2
| To: <sip:romeo@example.net>
| Call-ID: l04th3s1p@example.com
| Event: presence
| Max-Forwards: 70
| CSeq: 123 SUBSCRIBE
| Contact: <sip:sipgate.example.com;maddr=192.0.2.1;transport=tls>
| Accept: application/pidf+xml
| Expires: 3600
| Content-Length: 0
The SIP user then SHOULD send a response indicating acceptance of the
subscription request:
Example: SIP accepts subscription request:
| SIP/2.0 200 OK
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:romeo@example.net>
| To: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=ffd2
| Call-ID: l04th3s1p@example.com
| CSeq: 123 SUBSCRIBE
| Contact: <sip:simple.example.net;maddr=192.0.2.2;transport=tls>
| Expires: 3600
| Content-Length: 0
The XMPP-SIMPLE gateway SHOULD transform the 200 OK into a presence
stanza of type "subscribed":
Example: XMPP user receives acknowledgement from SIP contact:
| <presence to='romeo@example.net'
| from='juliet@example.com'
| type='subscribed'/>
The SIP user also SHOULD immediately send a presence notification to
the XMPP user (see Section 5).
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Note: It is the responsibility of the XMPP-SIMPLE gateway to set the
value of the Expires header and to periodically renew the
subscription on the SIMPLE side of the gateway so that the
subscription appears to be permanent to the XMPP user.
At any time after subscribing, the XMPP user may unsubscribe from the
contact's presence. This is done by sending a presence stanza of
type "unsubscribe":
Example: XMPP user unsubscribes from SIP contact:
| <presence from='juliet@example.com'
| to='romeo@example.net'
| type='unsubscribe'/>
The XMPP-SIMPLE gateway is responsible for translating the
unsubscribe command into a SIP SUBSCRIBE request with the Expires
header set to a value of zero:
Example: XMPP user unsubscribes from SIP contact (SIP
transformation):
| SUBSCRIBE sip:romeo@example.net SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=ffd2
| To: <sip:romeo@example.net>;tag=xfg9
| Call-ID: 1ckm32@example.com
| Event: presence
| Max-Forwards: 70
| CSeq: 789 SUBSCRIBE
| Contact: <sip:simple.example.net;maddr=192.0.2.2;transport=tls>
| Accept: application/pidf+xml
| Expires: 0
| Content-Length: 0
Upon sending the transformed unsubscribe, the XMPP-SIMPLE gateway
SHOULD a presence stanza of type "unsubscribed" to the XMPP user:
Example: XMPP user receives unsubscribed notification:
| <presence to='romeo@example.net'
| from='juliet@example.com'
| type='unsubscribed'/>
4.3 SIP to XMPP
A SIP user initiates a subscription to a contact's presence
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
information by sending a SIP SUBSCRIBE request to the contact. The
following is an example of such a request:
Example: SIP user subscribes to XMPP contact:
| SUBSCRIBE sip:juliet@example.com SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:romeo@example.net>;tag=ffd2
| To: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=xfg9
| Call-ID: 4wcm0n@example.net
| Event: presence
| Max-Forwards: 70
| CSeq: 263 SUBSCRIBE
| Contact: <sip:simple.example.net;maddr=192.0.2.2;transport=tls>
| Accept: application/pidf+xml
| Content-Length: 0
Upon receiving such a request, a SIMPLE-XMPP gateway is responsible
for translating it into an XMPP subscription request from the SIP
user to the XMPP user:
Example: SIP user subscribes to XMPP contact (XMPP transformation):
| <presence from='romeo@example.net'
| to='juliet@example.com'
| type='subscribe'/>
Notice that the Expires header was not included in the SUBSCRIBE
request; this means that the default value of 3600 (i.e., 3600
seconds = 1 hour) applies.
It is the responsibility of the SIMPLE-XMPP gateway to properly
handle the difference between short-lived SIP presence subscriptions
and long-lived XMPP presence subscriptions. The gateway has two
options when the SIP user's subscription expires:
o Cancel the subscription (i.e., treat it as temporary) and send an
XMPP presence stanza of type "unsubscribe" to the XMPP contact;
this honors the SIP semantic but will seem rather odd to the XMPP
contact.
o Maintain the subscription (i.e., treat it as long-lived) and send
(1) a SIP NOTIFY request to the SIP user containing a PIDF
document specifying that the XMPP contact now has a basic status
of "closed" and (2) an XMPP presence stanza of type "unavailable"
to the XMPP contact; this violates the letter of the SIP semantic
but will seem more natural to the XMPP contact.
Which of these options the SIMPLE-XMPP gateway chooses is up to the
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
implementation.
If the implementation chooses the first option, the protocol
generated would be as follows:
Example: SIP subscription expires (treated as temporary by gateway):
| <presence from='romeo@example.net'
| to='juliet@example.com'
| type='unsubscribe'/>
If the implementation chooses the second option, the protocol
generated would be as follows:
Example: SIP subscription expires (treated as long-lived by gateway):
| NOTIFY sip:192.0.2.2 SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=ffd2
| To: <sip:romeo@example.net>;tag=xfg9
| Call-ID: j4s0h4vny@example.com
| Event: presence
| Max-Forwards: 70
| CSeq: 232 NOTIFY
| Contact: <sip:sipgate.example.com;maddr=192.0.2.1;transport=tls>
| Content-Type: application/pidf+xml
| Content-Length: 194
|
| <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
| <presence xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf'
| entity='pres:juliet@example.com'>
| <tuple id='balcony'>
| <status>
| <basic>closed</basic>
| </status>
| </tuple>
| </presence>
Example: SIP subscription expires (treated as long-lived by gateway):
| <presence from='romeo@example.net'
| to='juliet@example.com'
| type='unavailable'/>
At any time, the SIP user may cancel the subscription by sending a
SUBSCRIBE request whose Expires header is set to a value of zero:
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Example: SIP user cancels subscription:
| SUBSCRIBE sip:juliet@example.com SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:romeo@example.net>;tag=ffd2
| To: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=xfg9
| Call-ID: 1tsn1ce@example.net
| Event: presence
| Max-Forwards: 70
| CSeq: 987 SUBSCRIBE
| Contact: <sip:simple.example.net;maddr=192.0.2.2;transport=tls>
| Expires: 0
| Accept: application/pidf+xml
| Content-Length: 0
As above, upon receiving such a request, a SIMPLE-XMPP gateway is
responsible for doing one of the following:
o Cancel the subscription (i.e., treat it as temporary) and send an
XMPP presence stanza of type "unsubscribe" to the XMPP contact.
o Maintain the subscription (i.e., treat it as long-lived) and send
(1) a SIP NOTIFY request to the SIP user containing a PIDF
document specifying that the XMPP contact now has a basic status
of "closed" and (2) an XMPP presence stanza of type "unavailable"
to the XMPP contact.
5. Presence Notifications
5.1 Overview
Both XMPP and presence-aware SIP systems enable entities (often but
not necessarily human users) to send presence notifications to other
entities. At a minimum, the term "presence" refers to information
about an entity's availability for communication on a network (on/
off), often supplemented by information that further specifies the
entity's communications context (e.g., "do not disturb"). Some
systems and protocols extend this notion even further and refer to
any relatively ephemeral information about an entity as a kind of
presence; categories of such "extended presence" include geographical
location (e.g., GPS coordinates), user mood (e.g., grumpy), user
activity (e.g., walking), and ambient environment (e.g., noisy). In
this document, we focus on the "least common denominator" of network
availability only, although future documents may address broader
notions of presence, including extended presence.
Presence using XMPP presence stanzas of type "available" or
"unavailable" is specified in [XMPP-IM]. SIP presence using a SIP
event package for presence is specified in [SIP-PRES].
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
As described in [XMPP-IM], presence information about an entity is
communicated by means of an XML <presence/> stanza sent over an XML
stream. In this document we will assume that such a presence stanza
is sent from an XMPP client to an XMPP server over an XML stream
negotiated between the client and the server, and that the client is
controlled by a human user (again, this is a simplifying assumption
introduced for explanatory purposes only). In general, XMPP presence
is sent by the user to the user's server and then broadcasted to all
entities who are subscribed to the user's presence information.
As described in [SIP-PRES], presence information about an entity is
communicated by means of a SIP NOTIFY event sent from a SIP user
agent to an intended recipient who is most generally referenced by an
Instant Message URI of the form <pres:user@domain> but who may be
referenced by a SIP or SIPS URI of the form <sip:user@domain> or
<sips:user@domain>. Here again we introduce the simplifying
assumption that the user agent is controlled by a human user.
5.2 XMPP to SIP
When Juliet interacts with her XMPP client to modify her presence
information (or when her client automatically updates her presence
information, e.g. via an "auto-away" feature), her client generates
an XMPP <presence/> stanza. The syntax of the <presence/> stanza,
including required and optional elements and attributes, is defined
in [XMPP-IM]. The following is an example of such a stanza:
Example: XMPP user sends presence notification:
| <presence from='juliet@example.com/balcony'/>
Upon receiving such a stanza, the XMPP server to which Juliet has
connected broadcasts it to all subscribers who are authorized to
receive presence notifications from Juliet. For each subscriber,
broadcasting the presence notification involves either delivering it
to a local recipient (if the hostname in the subscriber's address
matches one of the hostnames serviced by the XMPP server) or
attempting to route it to the foreign domain that services the
hostname in the subscriber's address. Naturally, in this document we
assume that the hostname is a SIP presence service hosted by a
separate server. As specified in [XMPP-IM], the XMPP server needs to
determine the identity of the foreign domain, which it does by
performing one or more [SRV] lookups. For presence stanzas, the
order of lookups recommended by [XMPP-IM] is to first try the "_xmpp-
server" service as specified in [XMPP-CORE] and to then try the
"_pres" service as specified in [IMP-SRV]. Here we assume that the
first lookup will fail but that the second lookup will succeed and
return a resolution "_pres._simple.example.net.", since we have
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
already assumed that the example.net hostname is running a SIP
presence service. (Note: The XMPP server may have previously
determined that the foreign domain is a SIMPLE server, in which case
it would not need to perform the SRV lookups; the caching of such
information is a matter of implementation and local service policy,
and is therefore out of scope for this document.)
Once the XMPP server has determined that the foreign domain is
serviced by a SIMPLE server, it must determine how to proceed. We
here assume that the XMPP server contains or has available to it an
XMPP-SIMPLE gateway. The XMPP server would then deliver the presence
stanza to the XMPP-SIMPLE gateway.
The XMPP-SIMPLE gateway is then responsible for translating the XMPP
presence stanza into a SIP NOTIFY request and included PIDF document
from the XMPP user to the SIP user:
Example: XMPP user sends presence notification (SIP transformation):
| NOTIFY sip:192.0.2.2 SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=ffd2
| To: <sip:romeo@example.net>;tag=xfg9
| Call-ID: j4s0h4vny@example.com
| Event: presence
| Subscription-State: active;expires=599
| Max-Forwards: 70
| CSeq: 157 NOTIFY
| Contact: <sip:sipgate.example.com;maddr=192.0.2.1;transport=tls>
| Content-Type: application/pidf+xml
| Content-Length: 192
|
| <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
| <presence xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf'
| entity='pres:juliet@example.com'>
| <tuple id='balcony'>
| <status>
| <basic>open</basic>
| </status>
| </tuple>
| </presence>
The mapping of XMPP syntax elements to SIP syntax elements SHOULD be
as shown in the following table. (Mappings for elements not
mentioned are undefined.)
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Table 5: Presence syntax mapping from XMPP to SIP
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+
| XMPP Element or Attribute | SIP Header or PIDF Data |
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+
| <presence/> stanza | "Event: presence" [1] |
| from | From |
| id | (no mapping) |
| to | To |
| type | basic status [2] |
| xml:lang | Content-Language |
| <priority/> | PIDF priority for tuple |
| <show/> | (no mapping) |
| <status/> | note [3] |
+-----------------------------+---------------------------+
Note the following regarding these mappings:
1. Only a presence stanza which lacks a 'type' attribute or whose
'type' attribute has a value of "unavailable" should be mapped by
an XMPP-SIMPLE gateway to a SIP NOTIFY request, since those are
the only presence stanzas that represent notifications.
2. Because the lack of a 'type' attribute indicates that an XMPP
entity is available for communications, the gateway SHOULD map
that information to a PIDF <basic/> status of "open". Because a
'type' attribute with a value of "unavailable" indicates that an
XMPP entity is not available for communications, the gateway
SHOULD map that information to a PIDF <basic/> status of
"closed".
3. The character data of the XMPP <status/> element MAY be mapped to
the character data of the PIDF <note/> element.
5.3 SIP to XMPP
When Romeo changes his presence, his SIP user agent generates a SIP
NOTIFY request. The syntax of the NOTIFY request is defined in [SIP-
PRES]. The following is an example of such a request:
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Example: SIP user sends presence notification:
| NOTIFY sip:192.0.2.1 SIP/2.0
| Via: SIP/2.0/TCP simple.example.net;branch=z9hG4bKna998sk
| From: <sip:romeo@example.net>;tag=ffd2
| To: <sip:juliet@example.com>;tag=xfg9
| Call-ID: j0sj4sv1m@example.net
| Event: presence
| Subscription-State: active;expires=499
| Max-Forwards: 70
| CSeq: 8775 NOTIFY
| Contact: <sip:simple.example.net;maddr=192.0.2.2;transport=tls>
| Content-Type: application/pidf+xml
| Content-Length: 193
|
| <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
| <presence xmlns='urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:pidf'
| entity='pres:romeo@example.net'>
| <tuple id='orchard'>
| <status>
| <basic>closed</basic>
| </status>
| </tuple>
| </presence>
Upon receiving such a request, a SIMPLE-XMPP gateway is responsible
for translating it into an XMPP presence stanza from the SIP user to
the XMPP user:
Example: SIP user sends presence notification (XMPP transformation):
| <presence from='romeo@example.net'
| to='juliet@example.com/balcony'
| type='unavailable'/>
The mapping of SIP syntax elements to XMPP syntax elements SHOULD be
as shown in the following table. (Mappings for elements not
mentioned are undefined.)
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 22]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Table 6: Presence syntax mapping from SIP to XMPP
+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| SIP Header or PIDF Data | XMPP Element or Attribute |
+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
| basic status | type [1] |
| Content-Language | xml:lang |
| CSeq | id (OPTIONAL) |
| From | from |
| priority for tuple | <priority/> |
| To | to |
| body of MESSAGE | <body/> |
+---------------------------+-----------------------------+
Note the following regarding these mappings:
1. A PIDF basic status of "open" SHOULD be mapped to no 'type'
attribute, and a PIDF basic status of "closed" SHOULD be mapped
to a 'type' attribute whose value is "unavailable".
6. Security Considerations
Detailed security considerations for instant messaging and presence
protocols are given in [IMP-REQS], specifically in Sections 5.1
through 5.4. Detailed security considerations for XMPP are given in
[XMPP-CORE]. Detailed security considerations for SIP-based
messaging are given in [SIP-IM] and for SIP-based presence are given
in [SIP-PRES] (see also the security considerations for the Session
Initiation Protocol given in [SIP]).
This document specifies methods for exchanging instant messages and
presence information through a gateway that translates between SIP
and XMPP. Such a gateway MUST be compliant with the minimum security
requirements of the instant messaging and presence protocols for
which it translates (i.e., SIP and XMPP). The introduction of
gateways to the security model of instant messaging and presence
specified in [IMP-REQS] introduces some new risks. In particular,
end-to-end security properties (especially confidentiality and
integrity) between instant messaging and presence user agents that
interface through a SIMPLE-XMPP gateway can be provided only if
common formats are supported. Specification of those common formats
is out of scope for this document, although it is recommended to use
[MSGFMT] for instant messages and [PIDF] for presence.
[IMP-REQS] requires that conformant technologies shall include
methods for blocking communications from unwanted addresses. Such
blocking is the responsibility of conformant technology (e.g., XMPP
or SIP) and is out of scope for this memo.
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 23]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
7. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Nathaniel Borenstein and Rohan Mahy for
suggestions and encouragement, Daniel-Constantin Mierla for earlier
work on SIMPLE-XMPP interworking, and Sandeep Sharma for feedback
based on implementation experience.
8. References
8.1 Normative References
[IMP-SRV] Peterson, J., "Address Resolution for Instant Messaging
and Presence", RFC 3861, August 2004.
[PIDF] Sugano, H., Fujimoto, S., Klyne, G., Bateman, A., Carr,
W., and J. Peterson, "Presence Information Data Format
(PIDF)", RFC 3863, August 2004.
[RFC822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the format of ARPA Internet
text messages", STD 11, RFC 822, August 1982.
[RFC2396] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396,
August 1998.
[SIP] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston,
A., Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M., and E.
Schooler, "SIP: Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261,
June 2002.
[SIP-IM] Campbell, B., Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Huitema, C.,
and D. Gurle, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension
for Instant Messaging", RFC 3428, December 2002.
[SIP-PRES]
Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP)", RFC 3856, August 2004.
[SRV] Gulbrandsen, A., Vixie, P., and L. Esibov, "A DNS RR for
specifying the location of services (DNS SRV)", RFC 2782,
February 2000.
[STRINGPREP]
Hoffman, P. and M. Blanchet, "Preparation of
Internationalized Strings ("STRINGPREP")", RFC 3454,
December 2002.
[TERMS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 24]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[URL-GUIDE]
Masinter, L., Alvestrand, H., Zigmond, D., and R. Petke,
"Guidelines for new URL Schemes", RFC 2718, November 1999.
[XMPP-CORE]
Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Core", RFC 3920, October 2004.
[XMPP-IM] Saint-Andre, P., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence",
RFC 3921, October 2004.
8.2 Informative References
[CPIM] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Instant Messaging
(CPIM)", RFC 3860, August 2004.
[CPP] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)",
RFC 3859, August 2004.
[IDNA] Faltstrom, P., Hoffman, P., and A. Costello,
"Internationalizing Domain Names in Applications (IDNA)",
RFC 3490, March 2003.
[IMP-MODEL]
Day, M., Rosenberg, J., and H. Sugano, "A Model for
Presence and Instant Messaging", RFC 2778, February 2000.
[IMP-REQS]
Day, M., Aggarwal, S., and J. Vincent, "Instant Messaging
/ Presence Protocol Requirements", RFC 2779,
February 2000.
[IRC] Oikarinen, J. and D. Reed, "Internet Relay Chat Protocol",
RFC 1459, May 1993.
[JEP-0106]
Saint-Andre, P. and J. Hildebrand, "JID Escaping", JSF
JEP 0106, May 2005.
[MSGFMT] Klyne, G. and D. Atkins, "Common Presence and Instant
Messaging (CPIM): Message Format", RFC 3862, August 2004.
[MSRP] Campbell, B., "The Message Session Relay Protocol",
draft-ietf-simple-message-sessions-11 (work in progress),
July 2005.
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 25]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
[SIMPLE-CPIM]
Rosenberg, J. and B. Campbell, "CPIM Mapping of SIMPLE
Presence and Instant Messaging",
draft-ietf-simple-cpim-mapping-01 (work in progress),
June 2002.
[XMPP-CPIM]
Saint-Andre, P., "Mapping the Extensible Messaging and
Presence Protocol (XMPP) to Common Presence and Instant
Messaging (CPIM)", RFC 3922, October 2004.
Authors' Addresses
Peter Saint-Andre
Jabber Software Foundation
P.O. Box 1641
Denver, CO 80201
US
Email: stpeter@jabber.org
Avshalom Houri
IBM
Building 18/D, Kiryat Weizmann Science Park
Rehovot 76123
Israel
Email: avshalom@il.ibm.com
Joe Hildebrand
Jabber, Inc.
1899 Wynkoop Street, Suite 600
Denver, CO 80202
US
Email: jhildebrand@jabber.com
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 26]
Internet-Draft Basic XMPP-SIMPLE Interop August 2005
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.
Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). 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.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Saint-Andre, et al. Expires February 9, 2006 [Page 27]