Internet Engineering Task Force
Internet Draft H. Schulzrinne
Columbia U.
P. Kyzivat
Cisco
V. Gurbani
Lucent
J. Rosenberg
dynamicsoft
draft-schulzrinne-simple-rpids-01.txt
February 18, 2003
Expires: August 2003
RPIDS -- Rich Presence Information Data Format for Presence Based on the Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP)
STATUS OF THIS MEMO
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress".
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
To view the list Internet-Draft Shadow Directories, see
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract
The Rich Presence Information Data Format for SIP (RPIDS) adds
elements to the Presence Information Data Format (PIDF) that provide
additional information about the presentity and its contacts. This
information can be translated into call routing behavior and/or be
delivered to watchers. The information is designed so that much of it
can be derived automatically, e.g., from calendar files or user
activity.
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 1]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
1 Introduction
The PIDF definition [1] describes a basic presence infornation data
format for exchanging presence information in CPIM-compliant systems.
It consists of a <presence> root element, zero or more <tuple>
elements carrying presence information, zero or more <note> elements
and zero or more extension elements from other name spaces. Each
tuple defines a basic status of either "open" or "closed".
This document provides additional status information for presentities
and defines a Rich Presence Information Data Format for Presence
Based on the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) (RPIDS) to convey this
information.
This extension has two main goals:
1. Provide rich presence indication that is at least as
powerful as common commercial presence systems. Such
feature-parity simplifies transition to CPIM-compliant
systems, both in terms of user acceptance and protocol
conversion.
2. Maintain compatibility with PIDF, so that PIDF-only
watchers and gateways can continue to function properly.
The document here is complementary to the device capability
descriptions derived from caller preferences [8]. Both can be used as
extensions within the same PIDF document.
We make no assumptions how the information in the RPIDS is generated.
Experience has shown that users are not always diligent about
updating their presence status. Thus, we want to make it as easy as
possible to derive RPIDS information from other information sources,
such as calendars, the status of communication devices such as
telephones, typing activity and physical presence detectors as
commonly found in energy-management systems.
The information in a presence document can be generated by a single
entity or can be composed from information published by multiple
entities.
Many of the elements correspond to data commonly found in personal
calendars. Thus, we attempted to align some of the extensions with
the usage found in calendar formats such as iCal [9] and xCal [10],
as noted below.
Note that PIDF documents and this extension can be used in two
different contexts, namely by the presentity to publish its presence
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 2]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
status and by the presence server to notify some set of watchers. The
presence server MAY compose, translate or filter the published
presence state before delivering customized presence information to
the watcher. For example, it may merge presence information from
multiple PUAs, remove whole elements, translate values in elements or
remove information from elements. Mechanisms that filter calls and
other communications to the presentity can subscribe to this presence
information just like a regular watcher and in turn generate
automated rules, such as scripts [11], that govern the actual
communications behavior of the presentity.
The flow diagram below illustrates this process.
presentity
|
--> publish
|
--> PA (filter)
--> notification 1 to A, B, C
--> notification 2 to D, E
--> notification 3 to F
--> notification 4 to script gen.
2 RPIDS Features
Below, we summarize and motivate the major additional features that
RPIDS adds to PIDF.
The PIDF definition does not clearly describe what a <tuple>
represents. We add an <class> element (Section 6.3) that labels each
tupel as being a presentity, a group of presentities or a device.
While the PIDF definition describes which means of communications are
available for a presentity, it does not describe the activity that
the presentity is currently engaged in. The <category> (Section 6.6)
element adds this information.
To help the watcher gauge the appropriateness of different types of
communications, we indicate the type of place the user is currently
in, via the <placetype> element (Section 6.4).
PIDF defines a <timestamp> element indicating the date and time of
the status change of a tuple. RPIDS adds a validity period for status
values, <from> and <until>, as a hint how long the current status is
likely to be valid (Section 6.7 and Section 6.8).
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 3]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
The <activity> (Section 6.9) and <idlesince> (Section 6.10) provide
information on when the device has last been used.
Presence information can provide hints as to how interruptible the
presentity is, thus aiding in finding a time and manner of
communications that is mutually convenient for both watcher and
presentity. The "priority" callee capability described in [12] and,
by reference, included in [8] offers this capability. This appears
to be more expressive than the simple "do-not-disturb" indication
found in some IM and presence systems.
An important sub-case is that a presentity is interruptible only
under unusual circumstances, after mediation by some, typically
human, authority such as a secretary or supervisor. We allow the
presentity to convey that certain contact addresses actually belong
to a different person, presumably one that can either interrupt the
presentity or otherwise assist. The <relationship> (Section 6.11)
element allows to indicate that a particular tuple refers to a
different principal or presentity.
PIDF only defines tuples for one presentity. In many cases, it is
useful to allow presentities to refer to groups of other
presentities. For example, a presentity all@example.com might
consist of
marketing@example.com ,
engineering@example.com , finance@example.com
engineering@example.com might in turn have presentities
alice@example.com ,
bob@example.org (an intern), carol@example.com ,
We add multiple layer to PIDF by defining an extension (Section 6.13)
that can in turn contain multiple PIDF presence elements, thus
allowing recursion.
We establish the convention that a tuple that has no contact address
indicates face-to-face communications. PIDF already notes that "there
might be tuples not related to any communications means".
We generally assume that the presence element describes a single
human being or a group of humans. However, this is not required. A
presentity can also be a "bot" or "avatar", for example.
Note that this document does not defined a new content type. Rather,
it inherits the content type from [1], namely application/cpim-
pidf+xml
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 4]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
Other useful information about tuples is defined in [8]. In
particular, that document allows to describe the media types
supported by a contact address, whether it supports recording and the
minimum priority of calls admitted.
3 Terminology and Conventions
This memo makes use of the vocabulary defined in the IMPP Model
document [2]. Terms such as CLOSED, INSTANT MESSAGE, OPEN, PRESENCE
SERVICE, PRESENTITY, WATCHER, and WATCHER USER AGENT in the memo are
used in the same meaning as defined therein. The key words MUST,
MUSTNOT, REQUIRED, SHOULD, SHOULDNOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL
in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP XX, RFC
2119 [3].
4 The Meaning of "open" and "closed"
PIDF describes the basic status values of "open" or "closed" only as
"have meanings of general availability for other communications
means". We define "closed" in our context as meaning that
communication to the contact address will in all likelihood not
succeed, is undesired or will not reach the intended party. (For
example, a presentity may include a hotel phone number as a contact.
After check-out, the phone number will still ring, but reach the
chambermaid or the next guest. Thus, it would be declared "closed".)
For "pres" contacts, "closed" means that no presence status
information is available.
The interpretation of "closed" was chosen since there is no
other status value to indicate that a communications
address is not reachable. Omitting the <contact> element
does not work since it would confuse watchers that have not
previously seen an "open" status for the same contact
address.
5 Groups of Presentities
In many practical applications, a watcher wants to subscribe to
groups of presentities rather than individuals. For example, the
group membership may change over time and it may thus be difficult to
subscribe to all members. If the group is large, the effort of
subscription and their renewals may add significant burden to the
watcher.
There are several different approaches to group subscriptions:
Group only: The watcher subscribes to a group and only cares
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 5]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
about the status of the group as a whole. There is no
protocol difference to subscribing to an individual and
thus no need for extensions.
Subscription only: The watcher subscribes to a group, but
receives individual notifications. This does not require an
extensions to PIDF. However, it is useful to indicate in
the presence document which presentity caused the
notification to be sent, as the watcher otherwise has no
idea why he received a particular notification. We add a
<parent> element to describe this relationship.
Subscription with redirection: The watcher subscribes to a
group. The presence document identifies the group members
and allows the watcher to subscribe to each member
individually. In PIDF, this is expressed by a "pres" URI in
the <contact> element. Each such presentity can in turn be
a group, recursively. TBD: How does the watcher find out if
group membership has changed? We don't want to list all
members in each PIDF notification. This basically becomes
draft-roach-sip-list-template.
Subscription with full status: A single notification contains
tuples from all presentities that have changed status since
the last notification. We allow "recursive" presence
definitions, where a <presence> element contains other
<presence> elements, encapsulated as <members> (Section
6.13).
6 RPIDS Elements
6.1 Introduction
Below, we describe the RPIDS elements in detail. <activity>,
<category>, <class>, <from>, <idlesince> <label>, <placetype>,
<privacy>, <relationship>, <until> extend <status>. <members>
extends the <presence> element.
In general, it is highly unlikely that a presentity will publish or
announce all of these elements at the same time. Rather, these
elements were chosen to give the presentity maximum flexibility in
deriving this information from existing sources, such as calendaring
tools, device activity sensors or location trackers, as well as to
manually configure this information.
The namespace URI for elements defined by this specification is a URN
[4], using the namespace identifier 'ietf' defined by [5] and
extended by [6]:
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 6]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:sip-rpids
6.2 Label
The <label> attribute is used by the presentity to label tuples. The
value is chosen arbitrarily and MUST NOT be modified by a composing
server or PA. There is no requirement that all tuples within a
presence document differ in their label or have a label at all.
Typically, the label remains the same across subscriptions and across
watchers.
The <label> makes it easier for policies to operate on
presence documents. The 'id' <tuple> attribute is not
guaranteed to remain constant across subscriptions. The
PIDF specification does not prevent a PA from modifying the
'id' attribute. An element, rather than an attribute, was
chosen since it appears less likely to cause
interoperability problems with plain PIDF parsers.
6.3 Contact-Type
The <contact-type> element describes the type of the tuple. A tuple
can represent a communication facility ("device"), a single
presentity ("individual") or a group of presentities ("group").
Additional classes can be registered with IANA.
URI schema are insufficient to distinguish the different
types of tuples. For example, a SIP URI can designate a
single device, a presentity, or a group of presentities.
6.4 Type of Place
The <placetype> element describes the type of place the presentity is
currently at. This offers the watcher an indication what kind of
communication is likely to be appropriate. We define an initial set
of values below:
home: The presentity is in a private or residential setting, not
necessarily the personal residence of the presentity, e.g.,
including hotel or a friend's home.
office: The presentity is in a business setting, such as an
office.
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 7]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
public: The presentity is in a public area such as a shopping
mall, street, park, public building, train station, airport
or in public conveyance such as a bus, train, plane or
ship.
This list can be augmented by free-text values or additional IANA-
registered values (Section 10).
6.5 Privacy
public: Others may be able to see or hear the communications.
private: Inappropriate individuals are not likely to see or hear
the communications.
quiet: The presentity is in a place such as a library,
restaurant, place-of-worship, or theater that discourages
noise, conversation and other distractions.
This indication is not limited to voice communications. For example,
a presentity might label her privacy as "quiet" when giving a talk,
since it would be inappropriate if an instant message popped up on
the laptop screen that is being projected for the audience.
6.6 Category Indications
The <category> indication describes what the presentity is currently
doing. This can be quite helpful to the watcher in judging how
appropriate a communication attempt is and which means of
communications is most likely to succeed and not annoy the
presentity. The activity indications correspond roughly to the
category field in calendar entries, such as Section 4.8.1.2 of RFC
2445 [9].
Use of an enumerated, but extensible, set of activity
categories simplifies automated generation and processing
of presence information. The categories can be readily
selected from a drop-down list by the user or translated
from the corresponding category field in calendars.
Recipients of this information can render at least a subset
as icons, automatically translate them into different
languages or convert them to sound "jingles" and speech, or
use them to generate call processing rules.
A category indication consists of one or more values drawn from the
list below, any other token string or IANA-registered values (Section
10). Communities of interest such as a profession or an organization
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 8]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
may define additional activity labels for their internal use.
On-the-phone: The presentity is talking on the telephone. This
category is included since it can often be derived
automatically.
Away: The presentity is physically away from the device
location. This category was included since it can often be
derived automatically from security systems, energy
management systems or entry badge systems.
Appointment: The presentity has a calendar appointment.
Holiday: This is a scheduled national or local holiday. This
information can typically be derived automatically from
calendars.
Meal: The presentity is scheduled for a meal. This category can
often be generated automatically from a calendar.
Meeting: This category can often be generated automatically from
a calendar.
Steering: The presentity is controlling a vehicle, ship or
plane.
In-transit: The presentity is riding in a vehicle, such as a
car, but not steering.
Travel: The presentity is on a business or personal trip, but
not necessarily in-transit. This category can often be
generated automatically from a calendar.
Vacation: This category can often be generated automatically
from a calendar.
Busy: User is busy, without further details. This category would
typically be indicated manually.
Permant-absence: Presentity will not return for the foreseeable
future, e.g., because it is no longer working for the
company.
6.7 From
The <from> element indicates how long the current status has been
valid, expressed as an absolute time.
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 9]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
6.8 Until
The <until> element indicates how long the current basic status (open
or closed) is likely to be valid, expressed as an absolute time.
This indication allows the watcher to make better decisions. For
example, if a presentity indicates that it is likely to be
unreachable for an extended period of time, the watcher may decide to
request assistance from somebody else, rather than waiting for the
presentity to return.
Often, the duration of the status information is not known precisely.
Thus, it is helpful to indicate the precision, here expressed in
seconds. For example, an absence of "a few hours" can easily be
expressed as a time some hours into the future, with a precision of
7200 seconds.
An absolute time was chosen to simplify integration with
calendaring applications. This combination appears to be
sematically cleaner than enumerating various measurement
units such as "months", "weeks", "days" or "hours".
Both the <from> and <until> information might be derived from
calendar information, reflecting the start and end time of an
activity. (Examples include the Date Time Start and Date Time End
properties of RFC 2445. For simplicity, RPIDS only supports single
events, without repetition.)
Any statements such as anticipated validity are not historical facts
and are forward-looking statements that involve risks and
uncertainties; actual results may differ from the forward-looking
statements.
6.9 Activity
The <activity> element describes whether the owner of the device has
recently been actively using the device or not. It can take the
values "active" and "inactive". For example, for a PC, the value
"inactive" may be inferred from the lack of keyboard and mouse
activity. For a telephone, an ongoing call translates into "active".
The idle indication has been available in many "finger"
implementations for several decades.
The <activity> indication provides a qualitative indication
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 10]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
that reveals less information to watchers than the
<idlesince> element
6.10 Idlesince
The <idlesince> records the time and date the communication device
was last used. This provides an indication as to how likely a user is
to answer the device. Depending on the device, this element can be
used together with <activity>, either "active" or "inactive". For
example, a keyboard activity detector may still declare a PC that has
not seen keyboard activity in two minutes as "active". For session-
based devices such as telephones and video conferencing systems,
<idlesince> would only be used with an activity value of "inactive".
6.11 Relationship
The <relationship> element designates the type of relationship an
alternate contact has with the presentity. This element is provided
only if the tuple refers to somebody other than the presentity.
Relationship values include "family", "associate" (e.g., for a
colleague), "assistant", "supervisor". Other free-text values and
additional IANA-registered values (Section 10) can be used as well.
The <contact> element can contain either a communication URI such as
"im", "sip"/"sips", "h323", "tel" or "mailto", or a presence URI,
such as "pres" or "sip". The method value in the <prescaps> element
[8] allows the watcher to determine whether a "sip" URI is meant to
indicate a presence or communications URI.
6.12 Timed Status
The <timed-status> describes status information that is either no
longer valid or covers some future timeperiod.
Timed status cannot be expressed with <tuples> elements
where the period between <status> since PIDF parsers would
not be able to distinguish current from future or past
information. It is occasionally useful to represent past
information since it may be the only known presence
information; it may give watchers an indication of the
current status. For example, indicating that the presentity
was at a meeting that ended an hour ago indicates that the
presentity is likely in transit at the current time.
6.13 Members
The <members> element contains zero or more <presence> elements, each
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 11]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
describing a member of the group. It is not necessary to provide the
<basic> status for each member.
Since the extension namespace for <presence> is restricted
to ##other, we cannot include the PIDF <presence> directly.
7 Examples
7.1 Single presentity
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:cpim-pidf"
xmlns:im="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:cpim-pidf:im"
xmlns:ep="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:sip-rpids"
entity="pres:someone@example.com">
<note>I'm in a boring meeting</note>
<tuple id="7c8dqui">
<status>
<basic>open</basic>
<contact>sip:secretary@example.com</contact>
</status>
<ep:relationship>assistant</>
<note>My secretary</note>
</tuple>
<tuple id="18x765">
<status>
<basic>open</basic>
<ep:category>meeting</ep:category>
<ep:placetype>office</ep:placetype>
<ep:privacy>quiet</ep:placetype>
<ep:activity>inactive</ep:activity>
<ep:idlesince>2003-01-27T10:43:00Z</ep:idlesince>
<ep:until>2003-01-27T17:30:00Z</ep:unitl>
</status>
<contact priority="0.8">sip:someone@example.com</contact>
<timestamp>2001-10-27T16:49:29Z</timestamp>
<ep:timed-status>
<basic>closed</basic>
<ep:from>2003-01-27T17:30:00Z</ep:from>
<ep:until>2003-01-27T19:30:00Z</ep:until>
</ep:timed-status>
</tuple>
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 12]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
<tuple id="35bs9r">
<status>
<basic>open</basic>
</status>
<contact priority="0.8">im:someone@mobilecarrier.net</contact>
<timestamp>2001-10-27T16:49:29Z</timestamp>
</tuple>
<tuple id="8eg92n">
<status>
<basic>open</basic>
</status>
<contact priority="1.0">mailto:someone@example.com</contact>
</tuple>
</presence>
7.2 Multiple Presentities
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<presence xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:cpim-pidf"
xmlns:im="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:cpim-pidf:im"
xmlns:ep="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:sip-rpids"
entity="pres:engineering@example.com">
<tuple id="478">
<status>
<basic>open</basic>
</status>
</tuple>
<members>
<presence ... entity="pres:alice@example.com">
<tuple id="1">
<status>
<basic>open</basic>
</status>
<contact>sip:alice@example.com</contact>
</tuple>
</presence>
<presence ... entity="pres:bob@example.com">
<tuple id="2">
<status>
<basic>closed</basic>
</status>
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 13]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
<contact>sip:bob@example.com</contact>
</tuple>
</presence>
<presence ... entity="pres:widget-engineering@example.com">
<tuple id="3">
<status>
<contact-category>group</contact-category>
</status>
</tuple>
</presence>
</members>
</presence>
8 XML Schema Definition
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xs:schema targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:sip-rpids"
xmlns:tns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:sip-rpids"
xmlns:pidf="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:cpim-pidf"
xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
attributeFormDefault="unqualified">
<!-- This import brings in the XML language attribute xml:lang-->
<xs:import namespace="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace"
schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/2001/xml.xsd"/>
<xs:element name="contact-type" type="tns:contact-type"/>
<xs:element name="placetype" type="xs:token"/>
<xs:element name="privacy" type="tns:privacy"/>
<xs:element name="category" type="xs:token"/>
<xs:element name="relationship" type="xs:token"/>
<xs:element name="from" type="tns:fromuntil">
<xs:element name="until" type="tns:fromuntil">
<xs:element name="idlesince" type="xs:dateTime">
<xs:element name="timed-status" type="tns:timed-status">
<xs:simpleType name="contact-type">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:enumeration value="individual"/>
<xs:enumeration value="device"/>
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 14]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
<xs:enumeration value="group"/>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="privacy">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:enumeration value="private"/>
<xs:enumeration value="public"/>
<xs:enumeration value="quiet"/>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:complexType name="fromuntil">
<xs:simpleContent>
<xs:extension base="xs:dateTime">
</xs:extension>
</xs:simpleContent>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="timed-status">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:element name="basic" type="pidf:basic" minOccurs="0"/>
<xs:element name="from" type="tns:fromuntil">
<xs:element name="until" type="tns:fromuntil">
<xs:element name="note" type="pidf:note">
<xs:any namespace="##other" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
<xs:complexType name="members">
<xs:sequence>
<xs:any namespace="pidf" processContents="lax" minOccurs="0"
maxOccurs="unbounded"/>
</xs:sequence>
</xs:complexType>
9 Security Considerations
The security considerations in [1] apply, as well as [7]. Compared to
PIDF, this presence document format reveals additional information
that can be highly sensitive. Beyond traditional security measures to
protect confidentiality and integrity, systems should offer a means
to selectively reveal information to particular watchers and to
inspect the information that is being published, particularly if it
is generated automatically from other sources, such as calendars or
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 15]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
sensors.
10 IANA Considerations
This document calls for IANA to:
o register a new XML namespace URN per [6];
o establish registry for categories (Section 6.6), place types
(Section 6.4), and relationships (Section 6.11).
Note that this document does not need a new content type. It inherits
the content type from [1], namely application/cpim-pidf+xml
10.1 URN Sub-Namespace Registration for
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:sip-rpids
Description: This is the XML namespace for XML elements defined
by RFCXXXX to describe a rich presence information
extension for the CPIM-PIDF presence document format in the
application/cpim-pidf+xml
content type.
Registrant Contact: IETF, SIMPLE working group,
<simple@ietf.org>,
Henning Schulzrinne, <hgs@cs.columbia.edu>
XML:
BEGIN
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML Basic 1.0//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/xhtml-basic10.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type"
content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1"/>
<title>RPIDS -- Rich Presence Information Data Format
for Presence Based on the Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP)</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1>Namespace for SIMPLE rich presence extension</h1>
<h2>application/cpim-pidf+xml</h2>
<p>See <a href="[[[URL of published RFC]]]">RFCXXXX</a>.</p>
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 16]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
</body>
</html>
END
10.2 Place Type, Device Type, Categories, Relationships
This document creates new IANA registries for categories, device
types, place types and relationships. All are XML tokens. Registered
tokens must be documented at the time of registration, as most
descriptions are expected to be brief.
The SIMPLE working group, or, if no longer available, the SIP working
group should be consulted prior to registration.
11 Acknowledgements
The document reflects the discussion on the SIMPLE mailing list, with
contributions from many individuals. Hisham Khartabil, Jon Peterson
and Brian Rosen provided detailed comments and suggestions.
12 Normative References
[1] H. Sugano, S. Fujimoto, et al., "Common presence and instant
messaging (cpim)presence information data format," internet draft,
Internet Engineering Task Force, Jan. 2003. Work in progress.
[2] M. Day, J. Rosenberg, and H. Sugano, "A model for presence and
instant messaging," RFC 2778, Internet Engineering Task Force, Feb.
2000.
[3] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in rfcs to indicate requirement
levels," RFC 2119, Internet Engineering Task Force, Mar. 1997.
[4] R. Moats, "URN syntax," RFC 2141, Internet Engineering Task
Force, May 1997.
[5] R. Moats, "A URN namespace for IETF documents," RFC 2648,
Internet Engineering Task Force, Aug. 1999.
[6] M. Mealling, "The IETF XML registry," internet draft, Internet
Engineering Task Force, July 2002. Work in progress.
[7] J. Rosenberg, "A presence event package for the session
initiation protocol (SIP)," internet draft, Internet Engineering Task
Force, Dec. 2002. Work in progress.
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 17]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
13 Informative References
[8] M. Lonnfors and K. Kiss, "SIMPLE PIDF presence capabilities
extension," internet draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, Oct.
2002. Work in progress.
[9] F. Dawson and D. Stenerson, "Internet calendaring and scheduling
core object specification (icalendar)," RFC 2445, Internet
Engineering Task Force, Nov. 1998.
[10] F. D. Jr., S. M. Reddy, D. Royer, and E. Plamondon, "icalendar
DTD document (xcal)," internet draft, Internet Engineering Task
Force, July 2002. Work in progress.
[11] J. Lennox and H. Schulzrinne, "CPL: a language for user control
of Internet telephony services," internet draft, Internet Engineering
Task Force, Nov. 2001. Work in progress.
[12] H. Schulzrinne and J. Rosenberg, "Session initiation protocol
(SIP) caller preferences and callee capabilities," internet draft,
Internet Engineering Task Force, Nov. 2002. Work in progress.
14 Authors' Addresses
Henning Schulzrinne
Dept. of Computer Science
Columbia University
1214 Amsterdam Avenue
New York, NY 10027
USA
Email: schulzrinne@cs.columbia.edu
Paul Kyzivat
Cisco Systems
Mail Stop LWL3/12/2
900 Chelmsford St.
Lowell, MA 01851
USA
Email: pkzivat@cisco.com
Vijay Gurbani
Lucent
2000 Naperville Rd., Room 6G-440
Naperville, IL 60566-7033
USA
Email: vkg@lucent.com
Jonathan Rosenberg
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 18]
Internet Draft RPIDS February 18, 2003
dynamicsoft
72 Eagle Rock Avenue
First Floor
East Hanover, NJ 07936
USA
Email: jdrosen@dynamicsoft.com
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implmentation may be prepared, copied, published and
distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 19]
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ........................................ 2
2 RPIDS Features ...................................... 3
3 Terminology and Conventions ......................... 5
4 The Meaning of "open" and "closed" .................. 5
5 Groups of Presentities .............................. 5
6 RPIDS Elements ...................................... 6
6.1 Introduction ........................................ 6
6.2 Label ............................................... 7
6.3 Contact-Type ........................................ 7
6.4 Type of Place ....................................... 7
6.5 Privacy ............................................. 8
6.6 Category Indications ................................ 8
6.7 From ................................................ 9
6.8 Until ............................................... 10
6.9 Activity ............................................ 10
6.10 Idlesince ........................................... 11
6.11 Relationship ........................................ 11
6.12 Timed Status ........................................ 11
6.13 Members ............................................. 11
7 Examples ............................................ 12
7.1 Single presentity ................................... 12
7.2 Multiple Presentities ............................... 13
8 XML Schema Definition ............................... 14
9 Security Considerations ............................. 15
10 IANA Considerations ................................. 16
10.1 URN Sub-Namespace Registration for .................. 16
10.2 Place Type, Device Type, Categories, Relationships
................................................................ 17
11 Acknowledgements .................................... 17
12 Normative References ................................ 17
13 Informative References .............................. 18
14 Authors' Addresses .................................. 18
H. Schulzrinne et. al. [Page 1]