idnits 2.17.1 draft-jennings-impp-vcard-02.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- 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 (February 14, 2004) is 7376 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: '5' is defined on line 200, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '6' is defined on line 204, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '7' is defined on line 208, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '8' is defined on line 211, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: '9' is defined on line 214, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2425 (ref. '1') (Obsoleted by RFC 6350) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2426 (ref. '2') (Obsoleted by RFC 6350) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2234 (ref. '4') (Obsoleted by RFC 4234) == Outdated reference: A later version (-04) exists of draft-butcher-irc-url-01 == Outdated reference: A later version (-08) exists of draft-saintandre-xmpp-uri-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-04) exists of draft-ietf-impp-pres-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-04) exists of draft-ietf-impp-im-03 Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 12 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 IMPP C. Jennings 3 Internet-Draft Cisco Systems 4 Expires: August 14, 2004 February 14, 2004 6 vCard Extensions for IMPP 7 draft-jennings-impp-vcard-02 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 August 14, 2004. 31 Copyright Notice 33 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 35 Abstract 37 This draft describes an extension to vCard to support Instant 38 Messaging (IM) and Presence Protocol (PP) applications. IM and PP are 39 becoming increasingly common ways of communicating, and users want to 40 save this contact information in their address books. This draft 41 allows a URI that is associated with IM or PP to be specified inside 42 of a vCard. 44 This work is being discussed on the imc-vcard@imc.org mailing list. 46 1. Conventions 48 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 49 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 50 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [3]. 52 2. Overview 54 As more and more people use various instant messaging (IM) and 55 presence protocol (PP) applications, it becomes important for them to 56 be able to share this contact address information along with the rest 57 of their contact information. RFC 2425 [1] and RFC 2426 [2] define a 58 standard format for this information which is referred to as vCard. 59 This document defines a new type in a vCard for representing instant 60 IM and PP URIs. It is very similar to existing types for representing 61 email address and telephone contact information. 63 The type entry to hold this new contact information is an IMPP type. 64 The IMPP entry has a single URI that indicates the address of a 65 service that provides IM, PP, or both. Also defined are some 66 parameters that give hints as to when certain URIs would be 67 appropriate. A given vCard can have multiple IMPP entries but each 68 entry can contain only one URI. Each IMPP entry can contain multiple 69 parameters. Any combination of parameters is valid, though a 70 parameter should occur at most once in a given IMPP entry. 72 The type of URI indicates what protocols might be useable for 73 accessing it, but this document does not define any of the types. For 74 example a URI type of "sip"[6] might indicate to use SIP/SIMPLE, 75 "xmpp"[7] indicates to use jabber, "irc"[5] indicates to use IRC, 76 "ymsgr" indicates to use yahoo, "msn" might indicate to use 77 messenger, "aim" indicates to use AOL, and "im"[9] or "pres"[8] 78 indicates to use a CPIM or CPP gateway. 80 The normative definition of this new vCard type is given in Section 81 3, and an informational ABNF is provided in Section 4. 83 3. IMPP Type Definition 85 To: ietf-mime-directory@imc.org 87 Subject: Registration of text/directory MIME type IMPP 89 Type name: IMPP 91 Type purpose: To specify the URI for instant messaging and presence 92 protocol communication with the object the vCard represents. 94 Type encoding: 8bit 96 Type value: A single URI. The type of the URI indicates the protocol 97 that can be used for this contact. 99 Type special notes: The type can include the type parameter "TYPE" to 100 specify an intended use for the URI. The TYPE parameter values can 101 include: 103 An indication of the type of communication for which this URI is 104 appropriate. This can be a value of PERSONAL or BUSINESS. 106 An indication of the location of a device associated with this URI. 107 Values can be HOME, WORK, or MOBILE. 109 An indication of some of the core capabilities of this instant 110 messaging system. Values can be PRES, VIDEO, VOICE, TEXT, SMS, 111 NUMERIC, and BEEP. PRES indicates the system supports some presence 112 protocol. VIDEO, VOICE, and TEXT indicate the system supports voice, 113 video, and text messaging respectively. SMS indicates short text 114 messages are supported. Short is not defined here, but something like 115 160 octets may be a reasonable assumption. NUMERIC indicates that 116 only numeric text messages are allowed. BEEP indicates that the only 117 information the system can deliver is that a message was sent to the 118 target user. 120 The value STORE indicates that the system can store messages for 121 future delivery to the intended user. 123 The value PREF indicates this is a preferred address and has the same 124 semantics as the PREF value in a TEL type. 126 4. Formal Grammar 128 The following ABNF grammar[4] extends the grammar found in RFC 2425 129 [1] and RFC 2426 [2]. 131 ;For name="IMPP" 132 param = impp-param ; Only impp parameters are allowed 134 value = uri 136 impp-param = "TYPE" "=" impp-type *("," impp-type) 138 impp-type = "PERSONAL" / "BUSINESS" / ; purpose of communications 139 "HOME" / "WORK" / "MOBILE" / ; useful? 140 "VIDEO" / "VOICE" / "TEXT" / ; core capabilities 141 "SMS" / "NUMERIC" / "BEEP" / "PRES" ; needed??? 142 "STORE" / ; like MSG 143 "PREF" / 144 iana-token / x-name; 145 ; Values are case insensitive 147 5. Example 149 BEGIN:vCard 150 VERSION:3.0 151 FN:John Doe 152 IMPP;TYPE=personal,text,store,pref:im:john@example.com 153 END:vCard 155 6. Open Issues 157 Are PERSONAL and BUSINESS a conflict in meaning with HOME and WORK? 158 In the TEL type HOME and WORK indicated a location, but they have 159 slowly come to be indicators that personal or business communication 160 is requested. Would a person with both a personal mobile phone and a 161 work mobile phone have HOME,MOBILE and WORK,MOBILE? 163 Is there any need for SMS, NUMERIC, BEEP? This is not a system for 164 negotiating capabilities and these seem like too fine detail. On the 165 other hand the existing vCard supports pagers and such, and these 166 definitions would help users avoid sending large messages to GSM cell 167 phones. 169 Is STORE needed? It mirrors the functionality of MSG in the TEL type 170 and is a feature supported by many IM systems. 172 7. IANA Considerations 174 Section 3 forms the IANA registration. 176 8. Security Considerations 178 This does not introduce additional security issues beyond current 179 vCard specification. It is worth noting that many people consider 180 their presence information more sensitive than some other address 181 information. Any system that stores or transfers vCards needs to 182 carefully consider the privacy issues around this information. 184 Normative References 186 [1] Howes, T., Smith, M. and F. Dawson, "A MIME -- --Content-Type 187 for Directory Information", RFC 2425, September 1998. 189 [2] Dawson, F. and T. Howes, "vCard MIME Directory Profile", RFC 190 2426, September 1998. 192 [3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 193 Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 195 Informational References 197 [4] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax 198 Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997. 200 [5] Butcher, S., "Uniform Resource Locator Schemes for Internet 201 Relay Chat Servers", draft-butcher-irc-url-01 (work in 202 progress), October 2003. 204 [6] Rosenberg, J., Schulzrinne, H., Camarillo, G., Johnston, A., 205 Peterson, J., Sparks, R., Handley, M. and E. Schooler, "SIP: 206 Session Initiation Protocol", RFC 3261, June 2002. 208 [7] Saint-Andre, P., "XMPP URI Format", draft-saintandre-xmpp-uri-00 209 (work in progress), September 2003. 211 [8] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Presence (CPP)", 212 draft-ietf-impp-pres-03 (work in progress), May 2003. 214 [9] Peterson, J., "Common Profile for Instant Messaging (CPIM)", 215 draft-ietf-impp-im-03 (work in progress), May 2003. 217 Author's Address 219 Cullen Jennings 220 Cisco Systems 221 170 West Tasman Drive 222 MS: SJC-21/2 223 San Jose, CA 95134 224 USA 226 Phone: +1 408 902-3341 227 EMail: fluffy@cisco.com 229 Intellectual Property Statement 231 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 232 intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to 233 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 234 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 235 might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it 236 has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the 237 IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and 238 standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of 239 claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of 240 licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to 241 obtain a general license or permission for the use of such 242 proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can 243 be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. 245 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 246 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 247 rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice 248 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive 249 Director. 251 Full Copyright Statement 253 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 255 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 256 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 257 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 258 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 259 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 260 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 261 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 262 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 263 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 264 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 265 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 266 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 267 English. 269 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 270 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. 272 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 273 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 274 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 275 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION 276 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 277 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 279 Acknowledgement 281 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 282 Internet Society.