idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-simple-xcap-list-usage-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 6 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 7 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (October 27, 2003) is 7487 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: '8' is defined on line 425, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '10' is defined on line 432, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. '2' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2141 (ref. '3') (Obsoleted by RFC 8141) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3023 (ref. '4') (Obsoleted by RFC 7303) ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 2648 (ref. '5') == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-ietf-simple-xcap-00 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3265 (ref. '10') (Obsoleted by RFC 6665) == Outdated reference: A later version (-07) exists of draft-ietf-simple-event-list-04 Summary: 5 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 7 warnings (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 SIMPLE J. Rosenberg 2 Internet-Draft dynamicsoft 3 Expires: April 26, 2004 October 27, 2003 5 An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Configuration Access Protocol 6 (XCAP) Usage for Resource Lists 7 draft-ietf-simple-xcap-list-usage-01 9 Status of this Memo 11 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 12 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 14 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 15 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other 16 groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. 18 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 19 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 20 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 21 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 23 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http:// 24 www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 26 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 29 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 26, 2004. 31 Copyright Notice 33 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. 35 Abstract 37 This document describes a usage of the Extensible Markup Language 38 (XML) Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) for manipulating lists of 39 resources. These lists can be used as presence lists (also known as 40 buddy lists or rosters), but this specification does not restrict 41 their usage to that. 43 Table of Contents 45 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 46 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 47 3. Application Unique ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 48 4. Structure of a Resource List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 49 5. Resource Interdependencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 50 6. Additional Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 51 7. Naming Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 52 8. Authorization Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 53 9. XML Schema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 54 10. Example Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 55 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 56 12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 57 12.1 XCAP Application Usage ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 58 12.2 application/resource-lists+xml MIME Type . . . . . . . . . . 16 59 12.3 URN Sub-Namespace Registration for 60 urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:resource-lists . . . . . . . . . . . 17 61 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 62 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 63 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 64 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 20 66 1. Introduction 68 In many communications applications, it is neccesary for the network 69 to have access to a list of resources that represent a group that the 70 user would like to apply an action to. One such example is a presence 71 list [13]. These lists are used by Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) 72 for Instant Messaging and Presence (SIMPLE) [9]Resource List Servers 73 (RLS) [11] for processing list subscriptions. Another example might 74 be list of recipients for an instant message, or a list of users to 75 invite to a conference bridge. 77 Generally, these lists will need to be manipulated by the end users 78 of the system, and used by servers in the network. To support such 79 manipulations, the XML Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP) [7] has 80 been defined. XCAP requires application usages to standardize several 81 pieces of information, including an application unique ID (AUID), an 82 XML schema, and various other pieces of information. This 83 specification fulfills those requirements. 85 The XML schema defined here has several other usages outside of XCAP: 87 1. A PC client application will need to know the users in the 88 presence list, so that it can generate a subscription to each 89 one. This information represents user provisioned data for the 90 application. Typically, this information is stored on local disk 91 in a proprietary file format. By defining a standard format, the 92 same list can be used by a multiplicity of different client 93 applications, providing portability across them. 95 2. It is common for users to share presence lists. As an example, 96 user A may have three people in their list that they wish to tell 97 user B about. User A would like to send an email to user B with 98 an attachment describing these three people. Should user B open 99 the attachment, the three people can be added to their own 100 presence list. Doing this requires a standardized format for 101 exchanging lists over email, instant messaging, and other 102 communications protocols. 104 2. Terminology 106 In this document, the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", 107 "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", 108 and "OPTIONAL" are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [1] and 109 indicate requirement levels for compliant implementations. 111 3. Application Unique ID 113 XCAP requires application usages to define a unique application usage 114 ID (AUID) in either the IETF tree or a vendor tree. This 115 specification defines the "resource-lists" AUID within the IETF tree, 116 via the IANA registration in Section 12. 118 4. Structure of a Resource List 120 A resource list is an XML [2] document that MUST be well-formed and 121 SHOULD be valid. Resource list documents MUST be based on XML 1.0 and 122 MUST be encoded using UTF-8. This specification makes use of XML 123 namespaces for identifying resource list documents and document 124 fragments. The namespace URI for elements defined by this 125 specification is a URN [3], using the namespace identifier 'ietf' 126 defined by [5] and extended by [6]. This URN is: 128 urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:resource-lists 130 A resource list document begins with the root element tag 131 ``resource-lists''. It consists of any number of ``list'' 132 sub-elements, each of which is a resource list. Other elements from 133 different namespaces MAY be present for the purposes of 134 extensibility; elements or attributes from unknown namespaces MUST be 135 ignored. There are three attributes associated with this element. The 136 first, "name", MUST be present: 138 name: This attribute is a descriptive name for the list. It MUST 139 be unique amongst all other list elements within the same parent 140 element. 142 Each list element will also have boolean attributes which indicate a 143 specific action that may be made against that list. This 144 specification defines a single attribute - subscribeable - which 145 indicates that the list may be subscribed to using the SIP event list 146 specification [11]. Extensions to this application usage MAY define 147 additional boolean elements, each within a different namespace, for 148 the purposes of indicating other actions that may be peformed. When 149 an attribute is absent, it implies that the operation is not 150 supported. 152 The third other attribute, "uri" MAY be present. It provides a URI 153 that can be used to access the list, for example, using the SIP event 154 notification extension for lists [11]. As a result, the URI MUST be 155 either a SIP URI or a pres URI [12]. 157 Each list element is composed of a sequence of entry elements, list 158 elements, external elements. The ability of a list element to contain 159 other list elements means that a resource list can be hierarchically 160 structured. An entry element describes a single presentity that is 161 part of the list. An external element contains a reference to a list 162 stored on another server. A list element can also contain elements 163 from other namespaces, for the purposes of extensibility. 165 The entry element describes a single resource. The entry element has 166 two attributes: 168 name: This mandatory attribute is a unique identifier amongst all 169 other entry elements of the same parent. 171 uri: This optional attribute is a URI that is used to access the 172 resource. It MUST be either a SIP or pres URI. 174 The entry element contains a sequence of other elements. Only one 175 such element is defined at this time, which is the display-name. This 176 element provides a UTF-8 encoded string, meant for consumption by the 177 user, that describes the resource. Unlike the "name" attribute of the 178 entry element, the display-name has no uniqueness requirements. Other 179 elements from other namespaces MAY be included. This is meant to 180 support the inclusion of other information about the entry, such as a 181 phone number or postal address. 183 5. Resource Interdependencies 185 An XCAP server supporting this application usage need only worry 186 about a single data interdependency - the "uri" attribute of the list 187 element. 189 If the "uri" attribute is absent in a document written to an XCAP 190 server, but the "subscribeable" flag is true, the XCAP server MUST 191 allocate a URI for this list. This allocated URI MUST be globally 192 unique, and MUST route to an RLS which will handle list subscriptions 193 for the list defined by the document. The server MUST set the uri 194 attribute of the document with this URI. 196 A server MUST NOT delete the "uri" attribute, however, should a 197 client change the subscribeable flag to false after the server has 198 allocated a URI. 200 6. Additional Constraints 202 There are no constraints on the document beyond those described in 203 the schema. 205 7. Naming Conventions 207 There are no naming conventions that need to be defined for this 208 application usage. A subscription to a resource list will be to a 209 specific URI. That URI will be one of the "uri" attributes defined in 210 a list within one of the documents managed by an XCAP server. 212 8. Authorization Policies 214 This application usage does not modify the default XCAP authorization 215 policy, which is that only a user can read, write or modify their own 216 documents. A server can allow priveleged users to modify documents 217 that they don't own, but the establishment and indication of such 218 policies is outside the scope of this document. It is anticipated 219 that a future application usage will define which users are allowed 220 to modify a list resource. 222 9. XML Schema 224 The following is the XML schema definition of the resource list: 226 227 231 232 233 234 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 251 253 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 276 10. Example Document 278 The following is an example of a document compliant to the schema: 280 281 282 283 284 Bill Doe 285 286 288 289 Joe Smith 290 291 292 Nancy Gross 293 294 http://www.example.org/xcap/resource-lists/users/a/foo 295 296 297 298 300 TODO: formally validate against schema. 302 11. Security Considerations 304 The configuration information defined by this application usage is 305 particularly sensitive. It represents the principle set of people 306 with whom a user would like to communicate. As a result, clients 307 SHOULD use TLS when contacting servers in order to fetch this 308 information. Note that this does not represent a change in 309 requirement strength from XCAP. 311 12. IANA Considerations 313 There are several IANA considerations associated with this 314 specification. 316 12.1 XCAP Application Usage ID 318 This section registers a new XCAP Application Usage ID (AUID) 319 according to the IANA procedures defined in [7]. 321 Name of the AUID: resource-lists 323 Description: A resource list application is any application that 324 needs access to a list of resources, identified by a URI, to which 325 operations, such as subscriptions, can be applied. 327 12.2 application/resource-lists+xml MIME Type 329 MIME media type name: application 331 MIME subtype name: resource-lists+xml 333 Mandatory parameters: none 335 Optional parameters: Same as charset parameter application/xml as 336 specified in RFC 3023 [4]. 338 Encoding considerations: Same as encoding considerations of 339 application/xml as specified in RFC 3023 [4]. 341 Security considerations: See Section 10 of RFC 3023 [4] and 342 Section 11 of this specification. 344 Interoperability considerations: none. 346 Published specification: This document. 348 Applications which use this media type: This document type has 349 been used to support subscriptions to lists of users [11] for 350 SIP-based presence [9]. 352 Additional Information: 354 Magic Number: None 355 File Extension: .rl or .xml 357 Macintosh file type code: "TEXT" 359 Personal and email address for further information: Jonathan 360 Rosenberg, jdrosen@jdrosen.net 362 Intended usage: COMMON 364 Author/Change controller: The IETF. 366 12.3 URN Sub-Namespace Registration for 367 urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:resource-lists 369 This section registers a new XML namespace, as per the guidelines in 370 [6] 372 URI: The URI for this namespace is 373 urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:resource-lists. 375 Registrant Contact: IETF, SIMPLE working group, (simple@ietf.org), 376 Jonathan Rosenberg (jdrosen@jdrosen.net). 378 XML: 380 BEGIN 381 382 384 385 386 388 Resource Lists Namespace 389 390 391

Namespace for Resource Lists

392

application/resource-lists+xml

393

See RFCXXXX.

394 395 396 END 398 Normative References 400 [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 401 Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 403 [2] Bray, T., Paoli, J., Sperberg-McQueen, C. and E. Maler, 404 "Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0 (Second Edition)", W3C REC 405 REC-xml-20001006, October 2000. 407 [3] Moats, R., "URN Syntax", RFC 2141, May 1997. 409 [4] Murata, M., St. Laurent, S. and D. Kohn, "XML Media Types", RFC 410 3023, January 2001. 412 [5] Moats, R., "A URN Namespace for IETF Documents", RFC 2648, 413 August 1999. 415 [6] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", 416 draft-mealling-iana-xmlns-registry-05 (work in progress), June 417 2003. 419 [7] Rosenberg, J., "The Extensible Markup Language (XML) 420 Configuration Access Protocol (XCAP)", 421 draft-ietf-simple-xcap-00 (work in progress), June 2003. 423 Informative References 425 [8] Day, M., Rosenberg, J. and H. Sugano, "A Model for Presence and 426 Instant Messaging", RFC 2778, February 2000. 428 [9] Rosenberg, J., "A Presence Event Package for the Session 429 Initiation Protocol (SIP)", draft-ietf-simple-presence-10 (work 430 in progress), January 2003. 432 [10] Roach, A., "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)-Specific Event 433 Notification", RFC 3265, June 2002. 435 [11] Roach, A., Rosenberg, J. and B. Campbell, "A Session Initiation 436 Protocol (SIP) Event Notification Extension for Resource 437 Lists", draft-ietf-simple-event-list-04 (work in progress), 438 June 2003. 440 [12] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)", 441 draft-ietf-impp-pres-04 (work in progress), October 2003. 443 [13] Rosenberg, J. and M. Isomaki, "Requirements for Manipulation of 444 Data Elements in Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for Instant 445 Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions (SIMPLE) Systems", 446 draft-ietf-simple-data-req-03 (work in progress), June 2003. 448 Author's Address 450 Jonathan Rosenberg 451 dynamicsoft 452 600 Lanidex Plaza 453 Parsippany, NJ 07052 454 US 456 Phone: +1 973 952-5000 457 EMail: jdrosen@dynamicsoft.com 458 URI: http://www.jdrosen.net 460 Intellectual Property Statement 462 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 463 intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to 464 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 465 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 466 might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it 467 has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the 468 IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and 469 standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of 470 claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of 471 licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to 472 obtain a general license or permission for the use of such 473 proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can 474 be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. 476 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 477 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 478 rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice 479 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive 480 Director. 482 Full Copyright Statement 484 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. 486 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 487 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 488 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 489 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 490 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 491 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 492 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 493 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 494 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 495 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 496 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 497 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 498 English. 500 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 501 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. 503 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 504 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 505 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 506 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION 507 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 508 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 510 Acknowledgement 512 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 513 Internet Society.