Internet DRAFT - draft-vaudreuil-umig-mime-voice
draft-vaudreuil-umig-mime-voice
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 12:02:44 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.20 (Unix)
Last-Modified: Fri, 04 Nov 1994 23:00:00 GMT
ETag: "3ddb84-bdeb-2ebabcf0"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 48619
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/plain
Network Working Group Greg Vaudreuil
Internet Draft Octel Network Services
Expires: May 1, 1995 November 3, 1994
MIME/ESMTP Profile for
Voice Messaging
<draft-vaudreuil-umig-mime-voice-01.txt>
Changes From the previous version
1) A large number of textual clarifications were made, including
discussion of X.440.2) The reference section was updated.3)
Examples were fixed to reflect the current text.
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet Draft. Internet Drafts are working
documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its
Areas, and its Working Groups. Note that other groups may also
distribute working documents as Internet Drafts.
Internet Drafts are 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 a "work in progress".
1.Abstract
A class of special-purpose computers has evolved to provide voice
messaging services. These machines generally interface to a
telephone switch and provide call answering and voice messaging
services. Traditionally, messages sent to a non-local machine
are transported using analog networking protocols based on DTMF
signaling and analog voice playback. As the demand for
networking increases, there is a need for a standard high-quality
digital protocol to connect these machines. The following
document is a profile of the Internet standard MIME and ESMTP
protocols for use as a digital voice networking protocol.
This profile is based on an earlier effort in the Audio Message
Interchange Specification (AMIS) group to define a voice
messaging protocol based on X.400 technology. This protocol is
intended to satisfy the user requirements statement from that
earlier work with the industry standard ESMTP/MIME mail protocol
infrastructures already used within corporate internets. This
profile will be called the voice profile in this document.
2.Scope and Design Goals
MIME is the Internet multipurpose, multimedia messaging standard.
This document explicitly recognizes its capabilities and provides
a mechanism for the exchange of various messaging technologies
including voice and facsimile.
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
It is not a goal to make interoperability possible between the
earlier X.400-based AMIS-Digital and this profile using a
standard X.400-to-MIME gateway. While the message encodings and
messages semantics are similar, the addressing and routing are
not. The X.400-based AMIS-Digital addressing format is
sufficiently customized so that it cannot be mapped to the RFC
822 mail format in the standard manner. The voice profile is
necessarily incompatible because it is intended to use the
standard TCP/IP mail addressing formats.
Because the 1988 X.400 based X.440 does not restrict the range of
addressing possible in X.400, translation to this protocol should
be possible using the standard X.400 to MIME gateway.
It is a goal of this effort to make as few changes to the
existing Internet mail protocols as possible while satisfying the
user requirements for Voice Networking. This goal is motivated
by the desire to increase the accessibility to digital messaging
by enabling the use of proven existing networking software for
rapid development.
This specification is intended for use on a TCP/IP network.
While it is possible to use these protocols for simple
-point networking, the specification is robust en -to point ough to
be used in an environment such as the global Internet with
installed base gateways which do not understand MIME. It is
expected that a messaging system will be managed by a system
administrator who can perform TCP/IP network configuration. When
using facsimile or multiple voice encodings, it is expected that
the system administrator will maintain a list of the capabilities
of the networked mail machines to reduce the sending of
undeliverable messages due to lack of feature support.
This specification is a profile of the relevant TCP/IP Internet
protocols. These technologies, as well as the specifications for
the Internet mail protocols, are defined in the Request for
Comment (RFC) document series. That series documents the
standards as well as the lore of the TCP/IP protocol suite. This
document should be read with the following RFC documents: RFC
821, the Simple Mail Transport Protocol; RFC 822, the Standard
for the format of ARPA Internet Messages; RFC 1521 and RFC 1522,
the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions; RFC 1425 and RFC 1427,
Extensions to the SMTP protocol (ESMTP); and RFC 882 and RFC 883,
the Domain Name System. Where additional functionality is
needed, it will be defined in this document or in an appendix.
3.Protocol Restrictions
This protocol does not limit the number of recipients per
message. Where possible, implementations should not restrict the
number of recipients in a single message.
recognising that no implementation supports unlimited
recipients, and that the number of supported recipients may
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 ] [Page 2
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
be quite low, ESMTP should be extended to provide a
mechanism for indicating the number of supported recipients.
This protocol does not limit the maximum message length.
Implementors should understand that some machines will be unable
to accept excessively long messages. A mechanism is defined in
the RFC 1425 ESMTP extensions to declare the maximum message size
supported.
The message size indicatd in the ESMTP SIZE command is in
bytes, not minutes. The number of bytes varies by voice
encoding format and must include the MIME wrapper overhead.
Translation into minutes, can be performed by simple
multiplication if the voice encoding is know from the system
configuration file.
Framework for the voice profile 4.
This document specifies a profile of the TCP/IP multimedia
messaging protocols for use by special-purpose voice processing
platforms. These platforms are not general-purpose computers and
often do not have facilities normally associated with an Internet
Email-capable computer.
The following are typical restrictions imposed by a voice
messaging platform:
1) Text messages are not normally received and often cannot be
displayed or viewed in the normal fashion. They can be
processed only via advanced text-to-speech or text-to-fax
features not currently present in these machines.
2) Voice mail (VM) machines act as an integrated Message
Transfer Agent and a User Agent. The VM is responsible for
final delivery, and there is no forwarding of messages. RFC
822 header fields have limited use in the context of the
simple messaging features currently deployed.
3) VM message stores are generally not capable of preserving the
full semantics of an Internet message. As such, use of a VM
for general message forwarding and gatewaying is not
supported. Storage of "Received" lines and "Message-ID" may
be limited.
Nothing in this document precludes use of a general purpose
email gateway from providing these services. However, severe
performance degradation may result if the email gateway does
not support the advanced ESMTP options required by this
document.
Internet-style mailing lists are not generally supported. 4)
Distribution lists are implemented as local alias lists.
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 ] [Page 3
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
There is generally no human operator. Error reports must be 5)
machine-parsable so that helpful responses can be given to
users whose only access mechanism is a telephone.
The system user names are limited to 16 or fewer numeric 6)
characters.
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 [Page ] 4
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
Message Format Profile 5.
The voice profile was written to be based on and be consistent
with the TCP/IP Email Protocol Suite with newly standardized
options for enhanced functionality and performance. This section
is an overview of the necessary protocols and a profile of the
applicable protocols as applied to the voice messaging
environment.
Message Addressing Formats 5.1.
RFC 822 and SMTP addressing uses the domain name system. This
naming system has two components: the local part, used for
username or mailbox identification; and the host part, used for
machine or node identification. These two components are
separated by the commercial "@" symbol.
The local part of the address is an ASCII string uniquely
identifying a mailbox on a destination system. The local part is
a printable string containing the mailbox number of the
originator or a recipient. Administration of this number space
is expected to be conform to national or corporate private
telephone numbering plans.
The domain part of the address is a hierarchical global name for
all machines. For participation in the international Internet
network or for integration within a corporate internet, each VM
machine is required to have a unique domain name. In the domain
name system, a name is registered with the Internet Assigned
Number Authority (IANA). The IANA may delegate the management of
a branch of the naming space to a company or service provider.
For example, a compliant message may contain the address
2145551212@mycompany.com. It should be noted that while the
example mailbox address is based on the North American Numbering
Plan, any other corporate numbering plan can be used. The use of
the domain naming system should be transparent to the user. It
is the responsibility of the VM to translate the dialed address
to the fully-qualified domain name (FQDN). The mapping of dialed
address to VM destination is generally accomplished through
implementation-specific means, usually a local table.
Mapping of the FQDN to a specific network destination is
generally performed by the Domain Name System. For networks with
a small number of machines, a locally-maintained host table
database can be used as a simpler alternative.
Special addresses are provided for compatibility with the
conventions of the Internet mail system and to facilitate
testing. These addresses do not use numeric local addresses,
both to conform to current Internet practice and to avoid
conflict with existing numeric addressing plans. Some special
addresses are as follows:
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 ] 5 [Page
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
Postmaster@domain
By convention, a special mailbox named "postmaster"
should exist on all systems. This address is used
for diagnostics and should be checked regularly by
the system manager. This mailbox is particularly
likely to receive text messages, which is not normal
on a voice processing platform; the specific
handling of these messages is a individual
implementation choice.
Loopback@domain
A special mailbox name named "loopback" should be
designated for loopback testing. All messages sent
to this mailbox must be returned back to the sender
as a new message. The originating address should be
"postmaster".
Because VMs do not use alpha-numeric addresses, this
address will not conflict with any internal
numbering plan. Internal to VM, a specific numeric
address for DTMF entry can be mapped to "loopback".
Note that without network level authentication, the
loopback address can be abused by routing messages
through a third-party VM to spoof another device or
to avoid toll charges. It is recommended that the
loopback feature be disabled except when testing the
networking between machines.
Message Header Fields 5.2.
Internet messages contain a header information block. This
header block contains information required to identify the
sender, the list of recipients, the message send time, and other
information intended for user presentation. Except for
specialized gateway and mailing list cases, headers do not
indicate delivery options for the transport of messages.
RFC 822 defines a set of standard message header fields. This
set is extended in several RFCs.
Note that the specific order of header lines is not specified.
The order cannot be expected to be preserved when sent through
intermediate gateways. The following header fields must be
supported.
From
The originator's fully-qualified domain address (a
mailbox number followed by the fully-qualified
domain name). The user listed in this field should
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 6] [Page
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
be presented in the voice message envelope as the
originator of the message.
It is recommended that all messages contain the text
personal name of the sender in a quoted phrase if
available. From [822]
Example:
From: "Joe S. User" <2145551212@mycompany.com>
To
The recipient's fully-qualified domain address.
There may be one or more To: fields in any message.
All recipients of a message must be listed in To
lines except when a recipient is specifically
intended to receive a blind carbon copy. Note that
many VM systems have no facilities for storing or
reporting to the recipient the list of recipients.
These systems will generally discard these headers
when received.
It is recommended that all messages contain the text
personal name of the recipient in a quoted phrase if
available. From [822]
Cc
Additional recipients' fully-qualified domain
address. This field has no meaning beyond "To:" in
a VM and is not to be generated by a conforming
implementation. It is included for processing by the
receiver for compatibility with general Internet
mail agents that may not restrict the use of this
field.
If the VM supports the reporting of multiple
recipients, all names in the To: and Cc: fields
should be reported. From [822]
Date
The date, time, and time zone the message was
composed by the originator, or the time specified by
the originator if the message is scheduled for
delayed delivery. Conforming implementations must
be able to convert RFC 822 date and time stamps into
local time. If the VM reports message-sent time,
the value in the Date field should be used, not the
time the message was received at the destination
system. From [822]
Example: Wed, 28 Jul 93 10:08:49 PDT
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 7] [Page
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
Sender
The actual address of the originator if the message
is sent by an agent on behalf of the author
indicated in the From: field. This field is not to
be generated by a conforming implementation. It is
included for processing by the receiver for
compatibility with general Internet mail software
that may generate this header.
The Sender field often contains the name of an
Internet-style mailing list administrator and is the
destination address for reporting errors if the
ESMTP MAIL FROM address is not available. While it
may not be possible to save this information in some
VM machines, discarding this information or the SMTP
MAIL FROM address will make it difficult to send an
error message to the proper destination. From [822]
Message-id
A unique per-message identifier. Conforming systems
must use an identifier constructed by concatenating
a unique 8-digit serial message number and the
sending VM's FQDN with the commercial @ symbol.
This identifier will be used for tracking, auditing,
and returning delivery reports. From [822]
Example:
Message-id: <12345678@mycompany.com>
Received
Special-purpose trace information added to the
beginning of a RFC 822 message by message transport
agents (MTA). This is the only header permitted to
be added by an MTA. Information in this header is
useful for debugging when using an ASCII message
reader or a header parsing tool. A conforming system
must add Received headers when acting as a gateway
and must not remove them. These headers may be
ignored or deleted when the message is received at
the final destination. From [822]
MIME Version
Indicates that the message is conformant to the MIME
message format specification. This header must be
present in any conforming message. Systems
conformant to this profile will include a comment
with the words "(VOICE 1.0)". From [MIME]
Example:
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 8] [Page
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
MIME-Version: 1.0 (VOICE 1.0)
Content-Type
The content-type header declares the type of content
enclosed in the message. One of the allowable
contents is multipart, a mechanism for bundling
several message components into a single message.
The allowable contents are specified in the next
section of this document. From [MIME]
Content-Transfer-Encoding
Because Internet mail was initially specified to
carry only 7-bit US-ASCII text, it may be necessary
to encode voice and fax data into a representation
suitable for that environment. The content-
transfer-encoding header describes this
transformation if it is needed. From [MIME]
Sensitivity
The requested privacy level. If this field exists,
regardless of the selected case-insensitive value
"Personal" or "Private". If no privacy is requested,
this field is omitted.
If a Sensitivity header is present in the message, a
conformant system is prohibited from forwarding this
message. If the receiving system does not support
privacy and the sensitivity is one of "Personal" or
"Private", the message must be returned to the
sender with an appropriate error message indicating
that privacy could not be assured and that the
message was not delivered.
The specific privacy values do not need to be
offered individually to users but can be set on a
system-wide basis. From [X400]
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 [Page ] 9
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
Importance
Indicates the requested priority to be given by the
receiving system. The case-insensitive values
"low", "normal" and "high" are specified. If no
special importance is requested, this header may be
omitted and the value assumed to be "normal". This
field can be used to order messages in a recipient's
mailbox and is equivalent to the AMIS-Digital
Priority indication. From [X400]
5.3. Message Content Types
MIME is a general-purpose message body format that is extensible
to carry a wide range of body parts. The basic protocol is
described in [MIME]. MIME also provides for encoding binary data
so that it can be transported over the 7-bit text-oriented SMTP
protocol. This transport encoding is independent of the audio
encoding designed to generate a binary object.
MIME defines two transport encoding mechanisms, one designed for
text-like data ("Quoted-Printable"), and one for arbitrary binary
data ("Base-64"). While Base-64 is dramatically more efficient
for audio data, both will work. A null encoding of "Binary" was
specified for use in an environment where binary transport is
available.
An implementation in conformance with this profile is required to
send audio data encoded as binary when binary message transport
is available. When binary transport is not available,
implementations must encode the message as Base-64. The
detection and decoding of "Quoted-Printable", "7bit", and "8bit"
must also be supported in order to meet MIME requirements and to
preserve interoperability with the fullest range of possible
devices.
The following content types are identified for use with this
profile. Note that each of these contents can be sent
individually in a message or wrapped in a multipart message to
send multi-segment messages.
Audio/Basic(RECOMMENDED)
Audio/Basic is defined as 64Kbps u-law in the base
MIME protocol document. Support of Audio/Basic is
recommended for compatibility with current Internet
workstations, but it is not required for conformance
with this profile. Conformant systems supporting
any audio content-type other than ADPCM should be
configurable on a per-destination basis. From
[MIME]
Message/RFC822 (REQUIRED)
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 10 [Page ]
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
MIME requires support of the Message/RFC822 message
encapsulation body part. This body part is used in
the Internet to forward complete messages within a
multipart/mixed message. Processing of this body
part entails trivial processing to
unencapsulate/encapsulate the message. It is not to
be sent by a system conformant to this profile but
must be accepted for conformance with basic MIME.
From [MIME]
Text/Plain (REQUIRED)
MIME requires support of the basic text/plain
content type. This content type has no
applicability within the voice messaging environment
and should not be sent. Specific handling depends
on the platform, and interpretation of this content-
type is left as an implementation decision. Options
include dropping the body part and sending a
delivery report indicating the lack of support,
text-to-speech, and text-to-fax support. From
[MIME]
Multipart/Mixed (REQUIRED)
MIME provides the facilities for enclosing several
body parts in a single message. Multipart/Mixed may
be used for sending multi-segment voice messages,
that is, to preserve across the network the
distinction between an annotation and a forwarded
message. Systems are permitted to collapse such a
multi-segment message into a single segment if
multi-segment messages are not supported on the
receiving machine. From [MIME]
Text/Signature (RECOMMENDED)
Text/Signature provides a mechanism for the sending
of per-user directory information including the
spoken name and the supported mailbox capabilities.
When used with a caching mechanism, basic directory
services with entries for commonly used entries can
be maintained. This body part is intended to be
used to support spoken name confirmation. The
Text/Signature can be included with a message using
the multipart/mixed constructor type. From [SIG]
Message/Notification (REQUIRED)
This new MIME body part is used for sending machine
parsable delivery status notifications. From
[NOTIFY]
Multipart/Report (REQUIRED)
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 11 [Page ]
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
The Multipart/Report is used for enclosing a
Message/Notification body part and any returned
message content. This body type is a companion to
Message/Notification. From [NOTIFY2]
Audio/ADPCM (REQUIRED)
CCITT Recommendation G.721 describes the algorithm
recommended for conversion of a 64 KB/s A-law or m-
law PCM channel to and from a 32 KB/s channel. The
conversion is applied to the PCM stream using an
Adaptive Differential Pulse Code Modulation (ADPCM)
transcoding technique. This algorithm will be
registered with the IANA for MIME use under the name
Audio/ADPCM.
Support of Audio/ADPCM is required for conformance
with this profile.
Proprietary Voice Formats (OPTIONAL)
Proprietary voice encoding formats are supported
under this profile provided a unique identifier is
registered with the IANA prior to use.
Note that use of proprietary encodings reduces
interoperability in the absence of explicit manual
system configuration.
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 ] [Page 12
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
Message Transport Protocol 6.
Messages are transported between VM machines using the Internet
Extended Simple Mail Transport Protocol (ESMTP). All information
required for proper delivery of the message is included in the
ESMTP dialog. This information, including the sender and
recipient addresses, is commonly referred to as the message
"envelope". This information is equivalent to the message
control block in many analog voice networking protocols.
ESMTP is a general-purpose messaging protocol, designed both to
send mail and to allow terminal console messaging. Simple Mail
Transport Protocol (SMTP) was originally created for the exchange
of US-ASCII 7-bit text messages. Binary and 8-bit text messages
have traditionally been transported by encoding the messages into
a 7-bit text-like form. [ESMTP] was recently published and
formalized an extension mechanism for SMTP, and subsequent RFCs
have defined 8-bit text networking, binary networking, and
extensions to permit the declaration of message size for the
efficient transmission of large messages such as multi-minute
voice mail.
A command streaming extension for high performance message
transmission has been defined. [PIPE] This extension reduces the
number of round-trip packet exchanges and makes it possible to
validate all recipient addresses in one operation. This
extension is optional but recommended.
The following sections list ESMTP commands, keywords, and
parameters that are required and those that are optional.
6.1. ESMTP Commands
HELO (REQUIRED)
Base SMTP greeting and identification of sender.
This command is not to be sent by conforming systems
unless the more-capable EHLO command is not
accepted. It is included for compatibility with
general SMTP implementations. From [SMTP]
MAIL FROM (REQUIRED)
Originating mailbox. This address contains the
mailbox to which errors should be sent. This
address may not be the same as the message sender
listed in the message header fields if the message
was gatewayed or sent to an Internet-style mailing
list. From [SMTP]
RCPT TO (REQUIRED)
Recipient's mailbox. This field contains only the
addresses to which the message should be delivered
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 13 [Page ]
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
for this transaction. In the event that multiple
transport connections to multiple destination
machines are required for the same message, this
list may not match the list of recipients in the
message header. From [SMTP]
DATA (REQUIRED)
Initiates the transfer of message data. This
command is required to be supported but should only
be used in the event the binary mode command BDAT is
not supported. From [SMTP]
TURN (RECOMMENDED)
Requests a change-of-roles, that is, the client that
opened the connection offers to assume the role of
server for any mail the remote machine may wish to
send. This command is useful to poll for messages.
(Note the security implications of using the turn
command to fetch mail queued for another
destination. This fetching is possible because of
the lack of authentication of the sending VM by the
protocol). From [SMTP]
QUIT (REQUIRED)
Requests that the connection be closed. If
accepted, the remote machine will reset and close
the connection. From [SMTP]
RSET (REQUIRED)
Resets the connection to its initial state. From
[SMTP]
VRFY (OPTIONAL)
Requests verification that this node can reach the
listed recipient. While this functionality is also
included in the RCPT TO command, VRFY allows the
query without beginning a mail transfer transaction.
This command is useful for debugging and tracing
problems. From [SMTP]
(Note that the implementation of VRFY may simplify
the guessing of a recipient's mailbox or automated
sweeps for valid mailbox addresses, resulting in a
possible reduction in privacy. Various
implementation techniques may be used to reduce the
threat, such as limiting the number of queries per
session.) From [SMTP]
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 14 [Page ]
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
EHLO (REQUIRED)
Enhanced mail greeting that enables a server to
announce support for extended messaging options.
The extended messaging modes are discussed in a
later section of this document. From [ESMTP]
BDAT (REQUIRED)
Initiates binary data transmission.
The BDAT command is an alternative to the earlier
DATA command. The BDAT command does not require
encoding voice data into 7-bit line-limited
formats.
All other commands must be recognized and an
appropriate error code returned if not supported.
From [BIN]
ESMTP Keywords 6.2.
STREAMING (Optional)
The "STREAMING" keyword indicates ability of the
receiving SMTP to accept pipelined SMTP commands.
From [PIPE]
SIZE (Required)
The "SIZE" keyword provides a mechanism by which the
receiving SMTP can indicate the maximum size message
supported. From [SIZE]
CHUNKING (Required)
The "CHUNKING" keyword indicates that the receiver
will support the high-performance transport mode.
Note that CHUNKING can be used with any message
format and does not imply support for binary encoded
messages. From [BIN]
BINARYMIME (Required)
NARYMIME" keyword indicates that the receiver The "BI
SMTP can accept binary encoded MIME messages. Note
that CHUNKING mode must be supported for this
option, but CHUNKING does not mean that binary
messages can be supported. From [BIN]
NOTIFY (Required)
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 15 [Page ]
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
The "NOTIFY" keywork indicates that the receiver
SMTP will accept explicit delivery status
notification requests. From [DSN]
6.3. ESMTP Parameters - MAIL FROM
BINARYMIME The current message is a binary encoded MIME
messages. From [BIN]
ESMTP Parameters - RC 6.4. PT TO
NOTIFY The conditions under which a delivery report should
be sent. From [DSN]
RET Whether the content of the message should be
returned. From [DSN]
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 [Page ] 16
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
Management Protocols 7.
The Internet protocols provide a mechanism for the management of
VM machines, from the management of the physical network through
the management of the message queues. SNMP should be supported
on a compliant message machine.
The digital interface to the VM and the TCP/IP protocols should
be managed by the standard network Managed Information Bases
(MIBs). MIB II provides basic statistics and reporting of the
TCP/IP protocol performance and statistics. Media-specific MIBs
are available for X.25, Ethernet, FDDI, Token Ring, Frame Relay,
and other network technologies. This MIB provides necessary
information to diagnose faulty hardware, overloaded network
conditions, and excessive traffic conditions from a remote
management station.
Management of the machine resources and message queue monitoring
based on the host MIB and the Message and Directory MIB is
recommended but not required for conformance with this profile.
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 ] 17 [Page
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
References 8.
[MIME] Borenstein, N., and N. Freed, "Multipurpose Internet
Mail Extensions", RFC 1521, Bellcore, Innosoft, Sept
1993.
[MSG822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet
Text Messages", STD 11, RFC 822, UDEL, August 1982.
[X400] Hardcastle-Kille, S., "Mapping between X.400(1988) /
ISO 10021 and RFC 822", RFC 1327, May 1992.
[PIPE] Freed, N., Klensin, J., "SMTP Service Extension for
Command Pipelining" Internet Draft <draft-freed-
streaming-0?.txt>
[ESMTP] Klensin, J., Freed, N., Rose, M., Stefferud, E., and D.
Crocker, "SMTP Service Extensions" RFC 1425, United
Nations University, Innosoft International, Inc., Dover
Beach Consulting, Inc., Network Management Associates,
Inc., The Branch Office, February 1993.
[SIZE] Klensin, J, Freed, N., Moore, K, "SMTP Service
Extensions for Message Size Declaration" RFC 1427,
United Nations University, Innosoft International,
Inc., Inc., February 1993. February 1993.
[8BIT] Klensin, J., Freed, N., Rose, M., Stefferud, E., D.
Crocker, "SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-
MIMEtransport" RFC 1426, United Nations University,
Innosoft International, Inc., Dover Beach Consulting,
Inc., Network Management Associates, Inc., The Branch
Office, February 1993.
[DNS1] Mockapetris, P.,"Domain names - implementation and
specification", RFC1035, Nov 1987.
[DNS2] Mockapetris, P.,"Domain names - concepts and
facilities", RFC 1034, Nov 1987.
[SMTP] Postel, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10,
RFC 821, USC/Information Sciences Institute, August
1982.
[SIG] Vaudreuil, G., "Text/Signature", Internet Draft <draft-
vaudreuil-signature-??.txt>
[BIN] Vaudreuil, G., "SMTP Service Extensions for
Transmission of Large and Binary MIME Messages",
Internet Draft <draft-vaudreuil-binary-??.txt>
[NOTIFY] Vaudreuil, G., Moore, K., "An Extensible Message Format
for Delivery Status Notifications", Internet Draft
<draft-ietf-notary-mime-delivery-0?-txt>
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 18 [Page ]
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
[NOTIFY2] Vaudreuil, G., "Multipart/Report", Internet-Draft,
<draft-ietf-notary-mime-report-0?.txt>
[DSN] Moore, K. "SMTP Service Extensions for Delivery Status
Notifications", Internet Draft <draft-ietf-notary-smtp-
drpt-??.txt>.
Security Consideration 9.
This document is a profile of existing Internet mail protcools.
As such, it does create any security issues not already existing
in the profiled Internet mail protocols themselves.
10. Author's Address
Gregory M. Vaudreuil
Octel Communications Corporation
Network Services Divison
17080 Dallas Parkway
Dallas, TX 75248-1905
214-733-2722
Gvaudre@Octel.Com
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 ] 19 [Page
Internet Draft MIME Voice Profile November 3, 1994
Appendix - Example Voice Message 11.
The following message is a full-featured, all-options-enabled
message addressed to two recipients. The message includes the
sender's spoken name and a short speech segment. The message is
marked as important and private. Read receipts and positive
delivery acknowledgment are requested.
To: 2145551212@vm1.mycompany.com
To: 2145551234@mv1.mycompany.com
From: 2175552345@VM2.mycompany.com
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 10:20:20 CST
MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice Profile Version 1)
Content-type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary = "MessageBoundary"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: VM1.mycompany.co-123456789
Sensitivity: PrivateImportance: High
--MessageBoundary
Content-type: Text/Signature
Name: User, Joe, R. (Joe Random User)
SpokenName: lslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpssdasddasdasd
(This is the base-64 encoded spoken name)
o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90geQ5tkjpokfgW
dlkgpokpeowrit09IpokporkgwI==
Capabilities: Audio/Basic, Audio/ADPCM, Application/Signature,
Image/G3Fax
--MessageBoundary
Content-type: Audio/ADPCM
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base-64
glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd
(This is a sample of the base-64 message data) fgdhgdfgd
jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gQ5tkjpokfgW
dlkgpokpeowrit09==
--MessageBoundary--
Gregory M. Vaudreuil
Octel Network Services
17060 Dallas Parkway
Suite 214
Dallas, TX 75248-1905
214-733-2722
Greg.Vaudreuil@ons.octel.com
Vaudreuil Expires 5/1/95 ] [Page 20
