Network Working Group A. Melnikov Internet-Draft Isode Limited Intended status: Standards Track H. Schulzrinne Expires: March 2, 2008 Columbia U. Q. Sun Huawei Technologies August 30, 2007 Sieve Notification Mechanism: SIP MESSAGE draft-melnikov-sieve-notify-sip-message-00 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 March 2, 2008. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Abstract This document describes a profile of the Sieve extension for notifications, to allow notifications to be sent over the SIP MESSAGE. Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Sieve Notification: SIP MESSAGE August 2007 Conventions Used in this Document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Notify parameter "method" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. Notify tag ":from" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.3. Notify tag ":options" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.4. Notify tag ":importance" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.5. Notify tag ":message" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.6. Other Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Internationalization Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 8 Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Sieve Notification: SIP MESSAGE August 2007 1. Introduction 1.1. Overview The NOTIFY [NOTIFY] extension to the SIEVE [SIEVE] mail filtering language is a framework for providing notifications by employing URIs to specify the notification mechanism. This document defines how SIP URIs (see RFC 3261 [RFC3261]) are used to generate notifications via the SIP MESSAGE (see RFC 3428 [RFC3428]). 1.2. Terminology This document inherits terminology from NOTIFY [NOTIFY], SIEVE [SIEVE], and RFC 3261 [RFC3261]. 2. Definition The sip message mechanism results in the sending of a SIP MESSAGE request to notify a recipient about an email message. 2.1. Notify parameter "method" The "method" parameter MUST be a URI that conforms to the SIP (or SIPS) URI scheme (as specified in RFC 3261 [RFC3261]) and that identifies a SIP (or SIPS) URI. The URI MAY include the resource identifier portion of a SIP address and URI parameters. The URI parameter "method" MUST be ignored, because only MESSAGE method is allowed by this specification. The processing application MUST extract a SIP address from the URI in accordance with the processing rules specified in RFC 3261 [RFC3261]. The resulting SIP address MUST be encapsulated in SIP URI syntax as Request-URI and the value of the "To" header field of the SIP MESSAGE request. 2.2. Notify tag ":from" The ":from" tag has no special meaning for this notification mechanism, and this specification puts no restriction on its use. As noted, the value of the SIP "From" header field specified in the SIP notification message MUST be the SIP address of the notification service itself. The value of the ":from" tag MUST use the SIP "Reply-To" syntax; if the :from value is specified and has valid syntax, it MUST be encapsulated as the value of a SIP header field named "Reply-To". If the value has invalid syntax, this is considered a Sieve script processing error. Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Sieve Notification: SIP MESSAGE August 2007 2.3. Notify tag ":options" This tag is not used by this method. 2.4. Notify tag ":importance" The value of the ":importance" tag MAY be transformed into SIP "Priority" header field (in addition to or instead of including in the default message); if specified, the value of the "Priority" header field MUST be "urgent" if the value of the ":importance" tag is "1", "normal" if the value of the ":importance" tag is "2", or "non-urgent" if the value of the ":importance" tag is "3". 2.5. Notify tag ":message" If included, the ":message" tag MUST be transformed into the message- body of a SIP MESSAGE, which SHOULD have Content-Type value of "text/ plain". If not included, the rule specified in NOTIFY [NOTIFY] SHOULD be followed, as shown in the examples below. 2.6. Other Definitions An implementation MUST ignore any URI parameter it does not understand (i.e., the URI MUST be processed as if the parameter were not present). It is RECOMMENDED not to use the hname "body" parameter value as the message-body of the SIP MESSAGE request. If hname "body" parameter and ":message" tag are presented at the same time, the "body" parameter MUST be ignored. The policy of retry delivery of a notification is a matter of implementation and is not specified herein. But it SHOULD follow the suggestion for retry in RFC 3261 [RFC3261]. 3. Examples In the following examples, the sender of the email has an address of , the entity to be notified has a SIP address of , and the notification service has a SIP address . The following is a basic Sieve notify action with only a method: notify "sip:romeo@example.com" The resulting SIP MESSAGE request might be as follows: Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Sieve Notification: SIP MESSAGE August 2007 MESSAGE sip:romeo@example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TCP notifier.example.com;branch=z9hG4bK776sgdkse Max-Forwards: 70 From: sip:notifier@example.com;tag=32328 To: sip:romeo@example.com Call-ID: asd88asd77a@1.2.3.4 CSeq: 1 MESSAGE Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 43 juliet@example.com; Contact me immediately! The following is a more advanced Sieve notify action with a method, importance, subject, and message: notify :importance "1" :message "Contact Juliet immediately!" "sip:romeo@example.com?subject=SIEVE" MESSAGE sip:romeo@example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/TCP notifier.example.com;branch=z9hG4bK776sgdkse Max-Forwards: 70 From: sip:notifier@example.com;tag=32328 To: sip:romeo@example.com Subject: SIEVE Priority: urgent Call-ID: asd88asd77a@1.2.3.4 CSeq: 1 MESSAGE Content-Type: text/plain Content-Length: 27 Contact Juliet immediately! 4. Internationalization Considerations TBD 5. Security Considerations UAs that support the MESSAGE request MUST implement end-to-end authentication, body integrity, and body confidentiality mechanisms. 6. Acknowledgements TBD Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Sieve Notification: SIP MESSAGE August 2007 7. Normative References [NOTIFY] Melnikov, A., "Sieve Extension: Notifications", draft-ietf-sieve-notify-08 (work in progress), February 2007. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997. [RFC3261] 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. [RFC3428] Campbell, B., Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Huitema, C., and D. Gurle, "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for Instant Messaging", RFC 3428, December 2002. [SIEVE] Guenther, P., "Sieve Extension: Notifications", Internet- Draft Sieve: An Email Filtering Language, February 2007. Authors' Addresses Alexey Melnikov Isode Limited 5 Castle Business Village 36 Station Road Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2BX UK Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com URI: http://www.melnikov.ca/ Henning Schulzrinne Columbia U. Columbia University Department of Computer Science New York, NY 10027 US Phone: +1 212 939 7004 Email: hgs@cs.columbia.edu Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Sieve Notification: SIP MESSAGE August 2007 Qian Sun Huawei Technologies Bantian Longgang Shenzhen, Guandong 518129 P.R China Phone: +86 755 28780808 Email: sunqian@huawei.com Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Sieve Notification: SIP MESSAGE August 2007 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Intellectual Property The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA). Melnikov, et al. Expires March 2, 2008 [Page 8]