From althenam@irelandlandforsale.com Tue Jan 01 12:01:06 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9kUD-0002WC-WE; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 12:01:06 -0500 Received: from p549edf1d.dip.t-dialin.net ([84.158.223.29]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9kUD-0007xz-6A; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 12:01:05 -0500 Received: from [84.158.223.29] by mxvm2.mail.yahoo.com; Tue, 0 Jan 2008 18:00:02 +0100 Message-ID: <0209fd44$14710000$1ddf9e54@althenam> From: "Dana Carver" To: Subject: Church Date: Tue, 0 Jan 2008 18:00:02 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 X-Spam-Score: 4.7 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Med^s are all on-sale today Save Time and Money, 100% safe http://turnbetween.com From ElmatercelAldrich@sshbea.org Tue Jan 01 13:02:54 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9lS2-0007rw-70; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 13:02:54 -0500 Received: from 213.37.200.166.dyn.user.ono.com ([213.37.200.166] helo=usuarioucqazw6) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9lS1-0000Cu-2z; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 13:02:54 -0500 Received: from nazi by sshbea.org with SMTP id wxFfUHBoTx for ; Tue, 1 Jan 2008 19:02:24 -0100 From: "Katharine Hooks" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9nMF-0003eT-OT; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 15:05:03 -0500 Received: from [81.215.222.134] (helo=toshbapc) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9nMF-0001uq-7R; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 15:05:03 -0500 Received: from crosswort by flyingpigmarathon.com with SMTP id 0fwVC7P7oy for ; Tue, 1 Jan 2008 22:04:37 -0200 From: "Mariana Ladd" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9skP-0005YQ-BC; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:50:21 -0500 Received: from static062038195042.dsl.hol.gr ([62.38.195.42] helo=user88a3d7b361) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9skO-0007oT-Nx; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 20:50:21 -0500 Received: from alabama by larimersquare.com with SMTP id Ik7p6OmvIM for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 03:49:53 -0200 From: "Elwood Campos" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9tQL-00009E-UF; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:33:41 -0500 Received: from [201.65.55.17] (helo=[201.65.55.17]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9tQK-0008OQ-OQ; Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:33:41 -0500 Received: from [201.65.55.17] by mailstore1.secureserver.net; Tue, 0 Jan 2008 22:32:37 -0400 Date: Tue, 0 Jan 2008 22:32:37 -0400 From: "Eddy Greer" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.62.03) Professional Reply-To: fiona.coates@cncareer.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <951377221.48292227186972@cncareer.com> To: sigtran-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Tunnel MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.1 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 Med^s are all on-sale today Save Time and Money, 100% safe http://ranmiddles.com From JillcliveBraun@poets.org Wed Jan 02 01:14:45 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9wsG-00048o-U8; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 01:14:45 -0500 Received: from [85.105.32.28] (helo=gokce4ccea813a) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9wsG-0002s3-Gq; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 01:14:44 -0500 Received: from downspout by poets.org with SMTP id xoiKZzBZpT for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 08:14:43 -0200 From: "Bertha Herron" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA0cY-0001pW-4B for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 05:14:46 -0500 Received: from p4fc73656.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([79.199.54.86]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA0cX-0006bh-KR for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 05:14:45 -0500 Received: from arthurmashine ([159.149.18.163] helo=arthurmashine) by p4FC73656.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1HTmpN-000CQJ-uB for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:28:07 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:27:32 +0100 From: "Hee garinger" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: gniyfihc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.4 (+) X-Scan-Signature: bb8eae9af85e4fcfe76f325e38493bf4 Voted by medical authorities as the only genuine penis enhancement product in the market. http://www.poeibeeto.com/ From richard_pinegar@steinmetz-forum.com Wed Jan 02 10:29:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA5Wq-0005rL-LJ; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:29:12 -0500 Received: from [194.178.1.2] (helo=[194.178.1.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA5Wp-0004eG-KA; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:29:12 -0500 Received: from [194.178.1.2] by mail.steinmetz-forum.com; Wed, 1 Jan 2008 16:28:08 +0100 Message-ID: <01c84c93$4add9c00$0201b2c2@richard_pinegar> From: "Edmond Mcdonough" To: Subject: Bathtub Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2008 16:28:08 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.2730.2 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.2730.2 X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Med^s are all on-sale today Save Time and Money, 100% safe http://atmay.com From mandgfqek@4student.co.uk Wed Jan 02 11:01:53 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA62S-0001SP-So for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:01:53 -0500 Received: from host105-230-dynamic.22-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([79.22.230.105]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA62S-0005M7-7U for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:01:52 -0500 Received: from pc2400 ([150.139.32.97]:6776 "EHLO pc2400" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by host105-230-dynamic.22-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it with ESMTP id S22IXWHZFRDPLRKY (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:02:07 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:01:53 +0100 From: "Gwendolyn mand" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: kutekier Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.6 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Ever been jealous of the long and thick dicks porn stars had? Here is
your chance! http://Ghioslas.com/
From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 02 11:42:29 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6ff-00036V-I0; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:23 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6fe-00036P-7q for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:22 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6fd-00036H-UJ for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:21 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6fb-0005DF-FK for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:21 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m02GgGBg003234; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:42:16 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:42:16 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Ephemeral vs persistent nicknames for chat Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:42:09 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDBF91562@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <47771783.8000706@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Ephemeral vs persistent nicknames for chat Thread-Index: AchKmGHznO0DYWuhTdu4HK0o7aRmoACvjE/w From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Paul Kyzivat" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jan 2008 16:42:16.0340 (UTC) FILETIME=[6EEDC540:01C84D5E] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 789c141a303c09204b537a4078e2a63f Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org The combining of ephemeral and persistent nicknames in the same conference unfortunately seems to complicate rather than simplify things. I have added some clarifying comments below if interest persists. > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >=20 > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > [snip snip] > > > > I find both mechanisms useful, and hoped to support both not selecting > > either in the conference. >=20 > I'm still unclear about what assumptions you are making. >=20 > Can both ephemeral and persistent nicknames be in use in the same > conference? Yes. All participants would have ephemeral nicknames, but could have persistent ones as well if supported by the client and the server. > If so, are they syntactically distinguishable from one another? Yes. They have nothing in common. Two different values associated with the same AOR. > If they can both be used, and are indistinguishable, then are all > persistent nicknames that *could* be used in a conference treated as > reserved names - ineligible for use as ephemeral nicknames? (Either they > are, or else a user with an ephemeral nickname could block the owner of > a persistent nickname from joining a conference.) They would not collide, but a client supporting both would have to juggle both. > > A traditional client could only support the conference scoped ephemeral > > nickname. >=20 > Do you mean a traditional client could only support use of conference > scoped ephemeral nicknames *for itself*? Its important that this not > prevent others in the conference from using persistent nicknames. > > The only real impact of this is would be the possibility of having your > requested nickname rejected even though you don't see it in use in the > conference. Your ephemeral nickname would have to be unique in the conference. The persistent nickname would have to be unique inside a domain (or other scope). > > If this is how the chat application currently relates to > > nicknames; replacing the current supported protocol with MSRP should > > just work. This is also how the user would expect the chat room to > > work. Collisions between nicknames among chat rooms are expected by the > > user of the traditional client. The "Operator" in one room may not be > > that same person as the "Operator" in another. The client could connect > > to the focus requesting privacy. The conference package requires the > > focus to generate a unique username inside the focus' domain which will > > be the routable address (skipping the .invalid part of the spec.). The > > initial ephemeral nickname could be the same as the generated username, > > but the participant can replace it using the proposed SetNickname method > > in MSRP. > > > > If you require a persistent nickname that doesn't collide with nicknames > > in other conferences, you can upgrade to an XCON client supporting rich > > conferencing. >=20 > I guess it is perhaps reasonable that you must support XCON to get > persistent nicknames. >=20 > But this must interoperate with simple users of the same conference that > don't support XCON. The rich client would have to support ephemeral nicknames, and it would interoperate. The legacy clients would not see the persistent nicknames though.=20 > Its also my opinion that the scoping of persistent nicknames should not > necessarily correlate with conference server operators. That is why I > think nicknames (at least persistent ones) should contain a scope. >=20 > Specifically, you and I might both be participating in a conference > hosted by an ietf server. My nickname might be scoped to aol.com and > yours might be scoped to msn.com. (However this is probably still > debatable - it blurs the line between what is a nickname and what is an > AOR.) This is exactly what I meant by persistent nicknames. Still I'm not sure my definition really qualifies as a nickname. > > It can set both the persistent and the ephemeral nicknames > > using CCMP. The persistent nickname would be an associated AOR to the > > user element in the XCON data model. Instead of distributing an > > anonymous AOR, the focus will use the received persistent nickname AOR > > having a nickname based . The client would need to juggle > > the persistent nickname AOR, the persistent nickname and > > the ephemeral nickname supported by legacy clients. If you persistent > > nickname AOR is "nicky@aol.com" having the of "Nicky" and > > the ephemeral nickname would be "treehugger", the client could render > > the following complete nickname: "Nicky (treehugger)". You avoid > > collision as another "Nicky" nicky@example.org" would need to select > > another ephemeral nickname like "Nicky (beerlover)". >=20 > I'm not quite following you. I don't understand the same participant > having both an ephemeral and a persistent nickname. I find that very > confusing and illogical. Seemed like a good idea at the time :-)=20 > Isn't it sufficient that nicky@aol.com is different from > nicky@example.org? If both are present then the client would render the > domain portion to resolve the ambiguity. I hoped that the nickname could be simpler than the AOR associated to the participant. That's one of the reasons I proposed always supporting ephemeral nicknames - being unique inside a conference, but very simple. This would make it possible to write only the ephemeral nickname to send a private message. Thanks, Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From wigwaggedo7@nhlreference.com Wed Jan 02 12:49:22 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA7iU-0004q6-3j for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:49:22 -0500 Received: from otradnoe28.nln.ru ([217.197.112.129]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA7iT-0007vi-2e for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 12:49:22 -0500 Received: from [217.197.112.129] by MAIL.nhlreference.com; Wed, 1 Jan 2008 20:49:20 +0300 From: "Luther Mcgowan" To: Subject: GrahamDickOverlarge Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2008 20:49:20 +0300 Message-ID: <01c84cb7$c81b0800$8170c5d9@wigwaggedo7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1158 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 AbdulBodypartOversize http://www.ikeir.com From appraisea46@ocprobation.com Wed Jan 02 13:01:32 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA7uG-00076q-OK for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:01:32 -0500 Received: from [78.165.55.183] (helo=[78.165.55.183]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA7u9-0008Ap-Fw for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:01:26 -0500 Received: from [78.165.55.183] by mx2.ocgov.com; Wed, 1 Jan 2008 20:01:24 +0200 From: "Antonio Rangel" To: Subject: JudyShlongConspicuous Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2008 20:01:24 +0200 Message-ID: <01c84cb1$15e04200$b737a54e@appraisea46> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2663 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 CockSuperAndrea http://www.ikeir.com From LouisegapeDavies@slate.com Wed Jan 02 17:31:24 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAC7Q-0008Ch-EY; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:31:24 -0500 Received: from 82-36-80-97.cable.ubr03.harb.blueyonder.co.uk ([82.36.80.97] helo=familiypc) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAC7Q-0006yB-1u; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:31:24 -0500 Received: from hell by slate.com with SMTP id jH3N8YFOKq for ; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 22:31:06 +0000 From: "Robin Blanton" To: Subject: Come see what it means to be a VIP. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Our casino is for you and everyone else who likes to win! We know how to treat our players - how about a $2400 welcome bonmus when you join? We know how to treat our players - how about a $2400 welcome bonmus when you join? Best offer in gambling history . http://playingsitebest.net/ From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 02 18:01:57 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JACar-0002Cu-Uu; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:01:49 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JACaq-0002Cp-Va for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:01:48 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JACaq-0002Cg-Le for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:01:48 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-3-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.72] helo=sj-iport-3.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JACap-0004QY-Uv for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:01:48 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,236,1196668800"; d="scan'208";a="16633344" Received: from sj-dkim-3.cisco.com ([171.71.179.195]) by sj-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Jan 2008 15:01:47 -0800 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-3.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m02N1lgN002575; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:01:47 -0800 Received: from [192.168.4.177] (sjc-fluffy-vpn1.cisco.com [10.25.236.82]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with SMTP id m02N1cjD024188; Wed, 2 Jan 2008 23:01:47 GMT In-Reply-To: <8053C665-4A8D-456C-9F3E-07AAC55FFEA1@nostrum.com> References: <8983EC086A9D954BA74D9763E853CF3E045A3F6A@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> <200712121555.38264.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> <476069CC.6000707@cisco.com> <8053C665-4A8D-456C-9F3E-07AAC55FFEA1@nostrum.com> Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <2947FBCC-5BA7-4832-A79E-58E6B7C4E66D@cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Cullen Jennings Subject: Re: [Simple] MSRP congestion control issue when using relays Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:00:46 -0800 To: simple@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=4136; t=1199314907; x=1200178907; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim3002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20MSRP=20congestion=20control= 20issue=20when=20using=20relays |Sender:=20; bh=Tx6c7loaVZ++DYYubxN25W9Hd8HZlAl8nonv1fktWuA=; b=vMixUFTUFQUQDGS4e5mOpbbunkZr/UVIxYZrk83QsX2qq7SGVssi1f7ugF d3p/500+g2uHxpxdNLKbidk57UCIXGkEU3Lj4VzuSY9EZq930np5j03sB4FW 6jjVB0xl+K; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-3; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim3002 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: 34d35111647d654d033d58d318c0d21a Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org There are two models to implement a relay .... One is the infinite storage model. This is the easiest one to do and more or less solves the congestion issues. Some people find the infinite storage is available assumption to be very reasonable (I think Rohan is in that camp) and some find it to be so totally insane it makes our heads explode ( suspect Adam might be in that camp ). The other model is the pipes model. If you have data coming in on pipe A and it needs to be copied to pipe B, then you read very slowly off pipe A as long as pipe B is congested and rely on TCP push-back. To make this not have HOL blocking problems, you need to buffer at least the chunk size and you need to control the kernel buffer sizes. You also needs some sane assumptions about the ratio of the slow pipe to size the kernel buffers and the amount of time before message from pipe C that goes to B can get interrupt the message from A. I imagine a nice masters these could be written on this. My memory is the spec allows either of these models to work but does not really describe how to implement either of them. If all you are doing is IM, well infinite storage may work while if you are doing file transfer, the pipe model might be more appealing. Cullen On Dec 13, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: > My memory (after dredging it for a few days) recalls that we ended > up with agreement that there were many ways to handle these kinds > of problems and that we would develop some experience around them. > Having one connection between relays was something explicitly > agreed to. Relays were expected to have significant, but not > infinite storage, and how the relay chose to manage that resource > was its own business. > > IIRC the question on having a slow outgoing leg back up the > incoming legs was put down when we realized the relay can just > close that outgoing leg and tell the incoming side of whatever was > going down that outgoing leg that the session's over. Other > existing sessions coming through those incoming pipes and going > down other outgoing pipes won't be affected. (Rohan - you may want > to chime in here). > > RjS > > On Dec 13, 2007, at 2:33 AM, Ruud Klaver wrote: > >> >> On Dec 13, 2007, at 12:07 AM, Paul Kyzivat wrote: >> >>> Its been a very long time, but some memories of discussions on >>> this subject are finally coming back to me... >>> >>> As I recall, there were in fact extensive discussions on this and >>> related topics. IIRC we ultimately concluded that we could not >>> solve every problem and so agreed to give up on solving this one. >>> I think the assumption was that the relays could be assumed to >>> have a lot of resources, such as the ability to buffer to disk to >>> mitigate this problem. >>> >>> I know that's not a very good answer, but its what I remember. I >>> may however be remembering wrongly. Hopefully somebody else can >>> confirm and fill in details, or else provide a different answer. >>> >>> Paul >> >> Thanks for responding as someone who took part in the original >> discussion. As I said, I tried reading up on it in the archives, >> but I'm sure I didn't catch all of it. >> >> As an implementor I am mostly interested in a practical solution >> and getting something that works. Assuming infinite storage does >> not sound very practical to me. Using one TCP connection per >> session sounds like a much more plausible compromise. >> >> Of course I can just go ahead and implement it any way I want, but >> I really wanted to raise this issue in the interest of >> interoperability, since the RFCs are just unclear about this. >> >> Ruud Klaver >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Simple mailing list >> Simple@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From staticm41@wolffprinting.com Wed Jan 02 18:32:16 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAD4K-0005A9-9B for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:32:16 -0500 Received: from [201.9.210.62] (helo=juraci-5dd56b8e) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAD4J-0008CV-A1 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:32:16 -0500 Received: from [201.9.210.62] by mail-incoming2.gate.com; Wed, 1 Jan 2008 20:32:14 -0300 From: "Bianca Bryan" To: Subject: ShlongGargantuanForest Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2008 20:32:14 -0300 Message-ID: <01c84cb5$648fdb00$3ed209c9@staticm41> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 LinwoodDickEnormous http://www.ikeir.com From LonniedominickCarlson@adobe.com Thu Jan 03 03:06:26 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAL5u-0006Bf-Bl; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 03:06:26 -0500 Received: from 62-101-126-214.ip.fastwebnet.it ([62.101.126.214] helo=silvia0fcf90ca.residential.fw) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAL5t-0000CZ-NZ; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 03:06:25 -0500 Received: from burial by adobe.com with SMTP id 6E23fwcVf4 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:06:01 -0100 From: "Guy Fleming" To: Subject: $2400 welcome bonus will be deposited in your new casino account! Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.2 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Players from the United States and around the world! Play your favorite games from the comfort of your home, USA players ARE included! Come find out. Get your bonus and walk the red carpet to winnings and fun. http://worldbcasino.net.cn/ From andrew.stevens@crimsonassociates.com Thu Jan 03 07:25:09 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAP8H-0004sJ-L8; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:25:09 -0500 Received: from p5481241b.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([84.129.36.27]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAP8G-0005oY-NK; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:25:09 -0500 Received: from [84.129.36.27] by mail.crimsonassociates.com; Thu, 2 Jan 2008 13:24:04 +0100 Message-ID: <01c84d42$bee5a340$1b248154@andrew.stevens> From: "Colleen Krause" To: Subject: See this Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2008 13:24:04 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1250"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 100% accurate Replicas Top Quality for Men, Women and Kids http://assikeii.com With sun's warmth wasted on a stone, Out of the picture of life, as it were, out One flash of eye, or blow one clarion-blast; From JonasdonnerSuarez@current.org Thu Jan 03 07:48:08 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAPUW-0005AR-0J; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:48:08 -0500 Received: from 62.42.175.63.dyn.user.ono.com ([62.42.175.63] helo=airis01) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAPUT-0006DD-CD; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 07:48:05 -0500 Received: from ewing by current.org with SMTP id TndaVRqOxi for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:47:52 -0100 From: "Wilburn Spence" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JART3-00030Y-RB; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:54:45 -0500 Received: from pool-151-197-36-213.phil.east.verizon.net ([151.197.36.213] helo=main) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JART3-0000PD-Hm; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 09:54:45 -0500 Received: from tip by aarp.org with SMTP id SHIy6a56jn for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:54:24 +0500 From: "Beverly Belcher" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAXHl-0002aP-UA for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 16:07:29 -0500 Received: from [75.137.145.201] (helo=YOUR-542A7E8CF0) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAXHk-0004LW-I2 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 16:07:29 -0500 Received: from [75.137.145.201] by mail.1nan.com; Thu, 2 Jan 2008 16:07:29 -0500 From: "Amber Curtis" To: Subject: Queen-sizedFuckstickLillie Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2008 16:07:29 -0500 Message-ID: <01c84d59$92c6f680$c991894b@skimmedbfy3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.8 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 JerryErectileorganBulky http://www.difyonnie.com From kaesean@sarahwood.com Thu Jan 03 17:37:28 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAYgq-0006aU-N6; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:37:28 -0500 Received: from [201.50.204.132] (helo=20150204132.user.veloxzone.com.br) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAYgp-0006SU-KY; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:37:28 -0500 Received: from [201.50.204.132] by mx00.1and1.com; Thu, 2 Jan 2008 19:36:22 -0300 Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2008 19:36:22 -0300 From: "Elias Fournier" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.10.01) Personal Reply-To: kaesean@sarahwood.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <042365843.06903150480534@sarahwood.com> To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: PaintBrush Cave MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----------59EF674B82974BF" X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080103-0, 03/01/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 ------------59EF674B82974BF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fast shipping of all our Health pills http://sallywhickeruo.googlepages.com   deep understanding of why  (and impress cocktail party guests) when to use them, how   ------------59EF674B82974BF Content-Type: text/html; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Fast shipping of all our Health pills
 
http://sallywhickeruo.googlepages.com
 
 
 
deep understanding of why
 
(and impress cocktail party guests)
 
when to use them, how
 
------------59EF674B82974BF-- From VincenttrapezoidHamilton@sgvtribune.com Thu Jan 03 18:34:39 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAZaB-0000f2-Ff; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:34:39 -0500 Received: from 81.203.214.254.dyn.user.ono.com ([81.203.214.254] helo=mich) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAZaA-0007Xc-Pk; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:34:39 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host39621687.sgvtribune.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id 9JqWX2PE71.212181.UYu.zjM.6749389538446 for ; Fri, 4 Jan 2008 00:34:30 -0100 Message-ID: <13d201c84e61$3474c040$6602a8c0@MICH> From: "Tony Graham" To: Subject: Confirmation link Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 00:34:30 -0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_13CE_01C84E61.3474C040" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_13CE_01C84E61.3474C040 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When you are young and stressed up… When you are aged and never give up… Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better sex more often. Learn More Now ------=_NextPart_000_13CE_01C84E61.3474C040 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_13CE_01C84E61.3474C040-- From EmanueldiminishCollier@poconorecord.com Thu Jan 03 21:51:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAceO-0001Jw-4T; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:51:12 -0500 Received: from pool-71-175-144-104.phlapa.east.verizon.net ([71.175.144.104] helo=ownerpc.myhome.westell.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAceN-000327-Pu; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:51:12 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host57216962.poconorecord.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id dxT8MiJv48.666007.DWu.PmV.1793571764827 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 21:50:49 +0500 Message-ID: <31f0901c84e7c$a094d9c0$2f01a8c0@OwnerPC> From: "Brendan Bryan" To: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_31F05_01C84E7C.A094D9C0-- From Penfold@splatterspaintball.com Thu Jan 03 23:29:18 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAeBK-0000WP-Pz for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 23:29:18 -0500 Received: from chello083144119195.chello.pl ([83.144.119.195]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAeBK-0004kZ-78 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 03 Jan 2008 23:29:18 -0500 Received: from troll ([103.190.140.54]:29598 "EHLO troll" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by chello083144119195.chello.pl with ESMTP id S22XFMTSRDKGDPPS (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jan 2008 05:29:59 +0100 Message-ID: <63457E2E.EFBBEED5@splatterspaintball.com> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 05:29:28 +0100 From: "Neila Penfold" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: ukayjuk Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.9 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 She loves my new found girth and size, let me share my secret to a
large penis with you! http://Cantbetiniers.com/
From GlorialimelightStinson@burningbird.net Fri Jan 04 02:28:10 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAgyQ-0002aE-Em; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 02:28:10 -0500 Received: from 211-20-231-201.fibertel.com.ar ([201.231.20.211] helo=mauro) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAgyP-0008B9-Vl; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 02:28:10 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host14854097.burningbird.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id rQlz2Xtp94.925892.YTL.XCu.9619855528461 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 05:23:20 -0100 Message-ID: <9305a01c84dc0$6edac5f0$d314e7c9@Mauro> From: "Ann Schaefer" To: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_93056_01C84DC0.6EDAC5F0-- From AlishaomniscientPrater@bookslut.com Fri Jan 04 06:14:52 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAkVo-000852-OD; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:14:52 -0500 Received: from [81.214.68.171] (helo=duygu) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAkVo-0006g0-0H; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:14:52 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host69877464.bookslut.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id S2LUsCTQ79.672382.ZGp.VVK.2484688353791 for ; Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:14:37 -0200 Message-ID: <76f2d01c84df9$dc302f80$0802a8c0@duygu> From: "Marla Street" To: Subject: Confirmation link Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:14:37 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_76F29_01C84DF9.DC302F80" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_76F29_01C84DF9.DC302F80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When you are young and stressed up… When you are aged and never give up… Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better sex more often. Learn More Now ------=_NextPart_000_76F29_01C84DF9.DC302F80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_76F29_01C84DF9.DC302F80-- From prudentedth@ass-ehreshoven.de Fri Jan 04 09:55:28 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAnxI-000162-KU for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 09:55:28 -0500 Received: from host105-253-static.48-88-b.business.telecomitalia.it ([88.48.253.105]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAnxH-0008Fr-Fm for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 09:55:27 -0500 Received: from Centralino01 ([100.163.103.58]:21200 "EHLO Centralino01" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by host105-253-static.48-88-b.business.telecomitalia.it with ESMTP id S22LIPYPQJARBWTJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Jan 2008 15:55:59 +0100 Message-ID: <314E1D5C.53E2F78A@ass-ehreshoven.de> Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 15:55:23 +0100 From: "Merle prudente" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: segdir Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040601070300060108000801" X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab --------------040601070300060108000801 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bigger is better, take VPXL for immediate and guaranteeed gains in size! http://www.Verysabels.com/ --------------040601070300060108000801 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bigger is better, take VPXL for immediate and guaranteeed gains in
size! http://www.Verysabels.com/
--------------040601070300060108000801-- From toni@spref.com Fri Jan 04 13:15:38 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAr50-0000eA-59; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:15:38 -0500 Received: from [216.98.119.158] (helo=notes.toray-tomac.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JAr4y-0005EF-VZ; Fri, 04 Jan 2008 13:15:37 -0500 Received: from [216.98.119.158] by mx00.kundenserver.de; Fri, 3 Jan 2008 13:14:33 -0500 From: "Marlin Hendrickson" To: Subject: Fungus Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2008 13:14:33 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: Aca6Q8TU7W2T51ZP2TBBWEGGSWANLS== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2527 Message-ID: <01c84e0a$949cc280$9e7762d8@toni> X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 We have Many types of med s We stock Hard to Find ones http://neroaxbddgmx.googlepages.com From pbdntiqlomx@bonn.ofcomes.mcx.es Sat Jan 05 03:12:16 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JB48e-0000IW-LU; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 03:12:16 -0500 Received: from [60.53.4.221] (helo=[60.53.4.221]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JB48Z-0007eW-CJ; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 03:12:12 -0500 Received: from [60.53.4.221] by mail0.mcx.es; Sat, 4 Jan 2008 16:12:10 +0800 From: "Bart Savage" To: Subject: Re: Bart Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2008 16:12:10 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: Aca6QW2MEPRYQBSQC1GFEUWEQY25SL== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Message-ID: <01c84eec$8f17a900$dd04353c@pbdntiqlomx> X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db We have Many types of med s We stock Hard to Find ones http://minmxapgbaxh.googlepages.com From ChancepiddleMayo@streetprophets.com Sat Jan 05 10:12:08 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBAgy-0001aj-DE; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 10:12:08 -0500 Received: from 85-18-136-88.fastres.net ([85.18.136.88] helo=grafica.fastwebnet.it) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBAgx-0006R6-QR; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 10:12:08 -0500 Message-ID: <984601c84fad$558efd70$9339ee24@grafica> From: "Boris Cooley" To: , =20
Your credit doesn't = matter to=20 us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 need IMMEDIATE money to spend ANY way you like or need Extra money to = give the=20 company a boost or require A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, = here is=20 our deal we can offer you TONIGHT (hurry, this tender will expire=20 TONIGHT):
=20
 
$40,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when our best = deal is=20 gone, it is gone. Simply fill this simplified form...
= =20
 
Do not worry about = approval, your=20 credit history will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://worldvcasino.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_9842_01C84FAD.558EFD70-- From proffitt@servorepairs.com Sat Jan 05 13:18:34 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBDbO-0002HO-Qx for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:18:34 -0500 Received: from i577bffea.versanet.de ([87.123.255.234] helo=i59F67C58.versanet.de) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBDbO-0001ZU-A7 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:18:34 -0500 Received: from PUMMEL ([164.147.160.30]:2515 "EHLO PUMMEL" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by i59F67C58.versanet.de with ESMTP id S22MRZLMQSEOUGMW (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Jan 2008 19:19:00 +0100 Message-ID: <5FB98733.B8093C32@servorepairs.com> Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 19:18:38 +0100 From: "ilhan proffitt" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: nt{ville Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.5 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7aefe408d50e9c7c47615841cb314bed Simply amazing sex, great pleasure, all night long - thanks to VPXL! http://Biigersstrongs.com/
From tequila99@zeelandnet.nl Sat Jan 05 19:13:03 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBJ8R-0007VH-QB for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 19:13:03 -0500 Received: from [190.45.236.86] (helo=familia-fbb1a4e) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBJ8Q-0001wx-KY for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 19:13:03 -0500 Received: from [190.45.236.86] by mail.zeelandnet.nl; , 5 Jan 2008 01:18:37 +0100 Date: , 5 Jan 2008 01:18:37 +0100 From: "Roberto Medeiros" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.81.14 Beta) Home Reply-To: tequila99@zeelandnet.nl X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <529276781.57437863141686@zeelandnet.nl> To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: God Pyramid MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 Improve yours and her sex. woman, love time with them a better you. http://www.hapburge.com does appear that the the patterns that trouble finding buddies It should be noted the next time you're Spontaneous, From JoeldarwinWebb@hansenagriplacement.com Sat Jan 05 20:44:26 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBKYs-0003wr-Bz; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 20:44:26 -0500 Received: from [67.203.205.61] (helo=yazminfcnrzk8x) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBKYr-0003MW-LY; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 20:44:26 -0500 Received: from transmittal by hansenagriplacement.com with SMTP id 2G8KFwUDWg for ; Sat, 5 Jan 2008 21:44:14 +0400 From: "Don Hunter" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBN7d-00037F-DM; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:28:29 -0500 Received: from ner-as20231.alshamil.net.ae ([217.164.239.165] helo=manavpc) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBN7c-0005Ue-Hz; Sat, 05 Jan 2008 23:28:29 -0500 Received: from fraught by finallysoftware.com with SMTP id qxncS0Skik for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 08:27:18 -0400 From: "Elbert Poole" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBQeB-0008Hz-2H; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 03:14:19 -0500 Received: from [59.20.71.136] (helo=xpd42866094099.kornet) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBQeA-0008S8-CV; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 03:14:18 -0500 Received: from fruehauf by internetworldstats.com with SMTP id 99OfJdzJ4W for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 17:14:07 -0900 From: "Carol Compton" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBS2G-0001xN-Lq; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 04:43:16 -0500 Received: from ppp-124.121.11.246.revip2.asianet.co.th ([124.121.11.246] helo=area-0cbfdcc618) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBS2F-0006sh-Bw; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 04:43:16 -0500 Received: from [124.121.11.246] by bltomato.com.inbound45.mxlogic.net; , 5 Jan 2008 16:43:14 +0700 Message-ID: <01c84fba$10893d00$f60b797c@nsxw> From: "Ariel Wilson" To: Subject: Re: Ariel Date: , 5 Jan 2008 16:43:14 +0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3338.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3338.1 X-Spam-Score: 4.4 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea Have much sex yours and her sex. woman, enjoy more time with you at last you. http://www.Youskabes.com of issues with a want to see how where safe you have spoken design problems Ginsburg, the report's lead author and From simple-bounces@ietf.org Sun Jan 06 05:13:15 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUl-0003Pw-2A; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:43 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUj-0003Pp-DR for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:41 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUj-0003Pg-3p for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:41 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUi-0006wx-Ju for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:41 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m06ACdkL004700 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:12:39 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:12:39 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:12:38 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DABAC@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Thread-Index: AchQTKn9MZrBiA6gQxW6XiIPPosCcw== From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2008 10:12:39.0609 (UTC) FILETIME=[AAF6B290:01C8504C] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Subject: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Being a lazy programmer I am concerned about later part of the following sentence in the current chat draft: "In this case the sender creates an MSRP SEND request with a Message/CPIM body whose To or Cc headers contain not the chat room URI but one or more nickname URIs or participant URIs." If I want to send a private message to a user of the conference, which URI should I choose? Should I chose the nickname URI or the participant URI for the MSRP SEND request? What are the criteria for selecting either? What do I do if a nickname URI corresponds to a participant URI for another user? IMHO, the lazy programer would just stick with one. All users of the conference must have a participant URI which is a SIP URI. It is required to be unique, routable inside the conference and could be routable outside the conference. It can be used to send a private message in a conference using MSRP SEND using the MSRP switch, or out of conference for any SIP request. If a user wants a specific AOR to be presented to the others as the participant URI, we should just let the user do that. Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Sun Jan 06 05:13:15 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUq-0003QJ-EA; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:48 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUp-0003QE-3f for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:47 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUo-0003Q6-PZ for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:46 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBSUo-0007QB-7N for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 05:12:46 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m06ACjDV004706 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:12:45 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:12:45 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:12:44 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DABAD@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchQTK3SFnRsF/zhT4yYLAVSc2F2yw== From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2008 10:12:45.0265 (UTC) FILETIME=[AE55BC10:01C8504C] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3 Subject: [Simple] Nickname scope X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I have seen three different scopes from the discussions on the list: 1. Chat room scope: chat32@focus.example.org or chat32.focus.example.org 2. Chat server or focus scope: focus.example.org 3. Domain: example.org This tells me is that it is not the nickname that needs to be a URI, but the scope of the nickname.=20 What if we extended the conference package to include: 1. A nickname string 2. A nickname scope URI We do not require the nickname string to be unique, but the combination of the nickname and scope URI. We could require the MSRP NICKNAME method to support scoping from the start: Set-Nickname: nicky chat32@focus.example.org Set-Nickname: nicky focus.example.org Set-Nickname: nicky example.org If we still have to construct a SIP URI from the nickname string and the nickname scope URI, multiple methods has been proposed on the list. Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From KayslugCourtney@greeningofindustry.org Sun Jan 06 06:13:39 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBTRj-0005GC-Mt; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:13:39 -0500 Received: from 84.120.190.116.dyn.user.ono.com ([84.120.190.116] helo=576nyauwu9zhvi7) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBTRj-0008RJ-A2; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 06:13:39 -0500 Received: from parke by greeningofindustry.org with SMTP id eICWHBRxmK for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 12:13:30 -0100 From: "Carole Lord" To: Subject: If you're in the US or anywhere else, join your new casino paradise. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Play your favorite games and get $2400 welcome bonus. Our safe, secure games will get you smiling when you start seeing dollars pouring in. USA players too! Download and GO! Best offer in gambling history . http://toprevolutiongame.com/ From MarisolauctioneerSegura@dmoz.org Sun Jan 06 09:27:52 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBWTg-0007Qe-1g; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:27:52 -0500 Received: from cpc2-hem12-0-0-cust244.lutn.cable.ntl.com ([82.24.212.245] helo=foster) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBWTf-0004Cd-DT; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 09:27:51 -0500 Message-ID: <1831301c85070$50826060$f5d41852@FOSTER> From: "Angelia Segura" To: Subject: Guaranteed rate over the life of your loan Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 14:27:39 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1830F_01C85070.50826060" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: f60d0f7806b0c40781eee6b9cd0b2135 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1830F_01C85070.50826060 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Your credit history doesn't matter to us! If you have your own business and require IMMEDIATE ready money to spend = ANY way you like or want Extra money to give your company a boost or = need A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here is the deal we can = offer you TODAY (hurry, this tender will expire TONIGHT): $39,000+ loan Hurry, when the deal is gone, it is gone. Simply fill out this plain = form... Don't worry about approval, your your credit report will not disqualify = you! http://worldvcasino.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_1830F_01C85070.50826060 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Your credit score does = not matter=20 to us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 wish IMMEDIATE money to spend ANY way you like or want Extra money to = give your=20 business a boost or need A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, = here is=20 the deal we can offer you THIS EVENING (hurry, this offer will expire=20 TONIGHT):
=20
 
$36,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when the deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply fill this elementary form...
=20
 
Do not worry about = approval, your=20 your credit report will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://worldvcasino.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_1830F_01C85070.50826060-- From Robinson@elmenda.com Sun Jan 06 11:13:35 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBY7z-0002Oi-Jp for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 11:13:35 -0500 Received: from pool-70-106-90-220.hag.east.verizon.net ([70.106.90.220] helo=pool-151-204-204-2.pskn.east.verizon.net) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBY7z-0006UR-9l for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 11:13:35 -0500 Received: by 10.175.58.191 with SMTP id mCHYutYDmpady; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:13:58 -0500 (GMT) Received: by 192.168.136.25 with SMTP id YdoPuDVVPwDipW.3557076180393; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:13:56 -0500 (GMT) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 11:13:53 -0500 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org From: "Witold Robinson" Subject: vedigger Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: bb8eae9af85e4fcfe76f325e38493bf4 Take VPXL today, and put on 2-3 inches within less than 4 months http://Uniersavable.com/ From jrypm@bnf.com Sun Jan 06 13:44:55 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBaUR-0005su-Ie; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:44:55 -0500 Received: from [200.74.219.114] (helo=[200.74.219.114]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBaUP-0002qY-SQ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 13:44:54 -0500 Received: from [200.74.219.114] by mx1.seastarnet.com; , 5 Jan 2008 14:44:52 -0400 From: "Arlene Street" To: Subject: Re: Arlene Date: , 5 Jan 2008 14:44:52 -0400 Message-ID: <01c84fa9$876a0a00$72db4ac8@jrypm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.2244.8 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.4 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 Have much sex your sex. woman, enjoy time with them a better you. http://www.Youskabes.com are evaluating claims your time on...something because young I appreciate that about inheritance might "There's just such a From MorrisbusinessmenByrd@presidentcasino.com Sun Jan 06 14:40:55 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBbMd-0002rz-14; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:40:55 -0500 Received: from [190.161.72.125] (helo=universib2685d) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBbMc-0004By-Lv; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 14:40:54 -0500 Received: from increment by presidentcasino.com with SMTP id kppAycR33j for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 16:40:49 +0400 From: "Clifton Jimenez" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBdM2-0008BN-KY; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 16:48:26 -0500 Received: from [86.157.193.36] (helo=oem) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBdM2-0006hk-6L; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 16:48:26 -0500 Received: from irreconcilable by faqs.org with SMTP id YFDJubI0U2 for ; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 21:47:59 +0000 From: "Harley Whitaker" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBgnw-0005hR-Mk; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:29:28 -0500 Received: from [190.9.67.34] (helo=desktop) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBgnw-0001kp-78; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:29:28 -0500 Message-ID: <0e4501c85035$c75c8fc0$ea01a8c0@desktop> From: "Lenny Haney" To: Cc: , =20
Your credit doesn't = matter to=20 us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 require IMMEDIATE ready money to spend ANY way you like or want Extra = money to=20 give your business a boost or need A low interest loan - NO STRINGS = ATTACHED,=20 here is our deal we can offer you THIS EVENING (hurry, this deal will = expire=20 TODAY):
=20
 
$68,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when our deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply fill out this elementary form...
=20
 
Don't worry about = approval, your=20 credit will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://worldvcasino.com.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_0E41_01C85035.C75C8FC0-- From IriswaspSwartz@yahoo.com Sun Jan 06 23:27:28 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjaC-0003r6-7x; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:27:28 -0500 Received: from [190.18.249.27] (helo=puesto07.domain) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjaB-0004a3-No; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:27:28 -0500 Message-ID: <150601c850e5$96f57260$6a01a8c0@Puesto07> From: "Iris Edmonds" To: Subject: Great Solution for seasonal merchants Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 05:27:07 -0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1502_01C850E5.96F57260" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.3790.2663 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2757 X-Spam-Score: 1.5 (+) X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1502_01C850E5.96F57260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Your your credit report doesn't matter to us! If you have your own business and want IMMEDIATE cash to spend ANY way = you like or need Extra money to give the business a boost or require A = low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here is the deal we can offer = you THIS NIGHT (hurry, this tender will expire TONIGHT): $50,000+ loan Hurry, when the deal is gone, it is gone. Simply finish this plain = form... Don't worry about approval, your your credit report will not disqualify = you! http://worldvcasino.com.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_1502_01C850E5.96F57260 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Your your credit = report doesn't=20 matter to us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 wish IMMEDIATE money to spend ANY way you like or require Extra money to = give=20 the company a boost or want A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, = here is=20 the deal we can offer you TONIGHT (hurry, this tender will expire THIS=20 NIGHT):
=20
 
$32,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when the deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply fill this easy form...
=20
 
Do not worry about = approval, your=20 your credit report will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://worldvcasino.com.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_1502_01C850E5.96F57260-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Sun Jan 06 23:37:15 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjjV-0005Gq-UQ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:37:05 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjjU-0005Gl-SS for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:37:04 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjjU-0005Gd-GU for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:37:04 -0500 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.181]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjjT-0004ho-Ml for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:37:04 -0500 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x19so3707580pyg.24 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:37:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=kG2Dk0SQcWCmBxy4YTdVqgsn3D62ZSUO0qcJL6oFRe0=; b=wXLs2h6lFooGFZRV82oy9YgkmY21MJqaNtNd3E+lBFAZ6g+1Vl5dzUTUG87krA2k316KBxwdL4JCxKbnNri4HqJZZa+Ae3TTYZ4TwfyykBthoM3PTvEZ8koT3mZq6nFOQDK9Sxpdytpe1iqWEVW1L1O1gwmjtYXKy2DZRgMBM8s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=iRuStV/pMNQTXCabHmlHzPs+uo1rj2u0SKNx/eDO679WDaXKLnCshkGdbUmy7vKVXs46dF6huqOcMOVCTtDvCrKdaPpwGjlvgvE7KWMsvJxwmVNpKQlkLoPZiPlSed11B1RMD+zVC6XKeP6pTMjXhfA4/RR89jAFrVT4HhdU9DI= Received: by 10.64.156.2 with SMTP id d2mr41258215qbe.54.1199680622743; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:37:02 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.143.1 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 20:37:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <66cd252f0801062037t5d3d6faehff804ae4535ee191@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:37:02 +1100 From: "Hisham Khartabil" To: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" Subject: Re: [Simple] Ephemeral vs persistent nicknames for chat In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDBF91562@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <47771783.8000706@cisco.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDBF91562@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 20f22c03b5c66958bff5ef54fcda6e48 Cc: Paul Kyzivat , simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I don't even know why we talk about persistant nickname in the context of SIMPLE. Adhoc conference and ad hoc nicknames is what we want, imo. I suggest ephemeral nicknames are unique per domain (not per conference focus) and are allocated on first come first serve basis. Thanks, Hisham On 03/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > The combining of ephemeral and persistent nicknames in the same > conference unfortunately seems to complicate rather than simplify > things. > > I have added some clarifying comments below if interest persists. > > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > > > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > > [snip snip] > > > > > > I find both mechanisms useful, and hoped to support both not > selecting > > > either in the conference. > > > > I'm still unclear about what assumptions you are making. > > > > Can both ephemeral and persistent nicknames be in use in the same > > conference? > > Yes. All participants would have ephemeral nicknames, but could have > persistent ones as well if supported by the client and the server. > > > If so, are they syntactically distinguishable from one another? > > Yes. They have nothing in common. Two different values associated with > the same AOR. > > > If they can both be used, and are indistinguishable, then are all > > persistent nicknames that *could* be used in a conference treated as > > reserved names - ineligible for use as ephemeral nicknames? (Either > they > > are, or else a user with an ephemeral nickname could block the owner > of > > a persistent nickname from joining a conference.) > > They would not collide, but a client supporting both would have to > juggle both. > > > > A traditional client could only support the conference scoped > ephemeral > > > nickname. > > > > Do you mean a traditional client could only support use of conference > > scoped ephemeral nicknames *for itself*? Its important that this not > > prevent others in the conference from using persistent nicknames. > > > > The only real impact of this is would be the possibility of having > your > > requested nickname rejected even though you don't see it in use in the > > conference. > > Your ephemeral nickname would have to be unique in the conference. The > persistent nickname would have to be unique inside a domain (or other > scope). > > > > If this is how the chat application currently relates to > > > nicknames; replacing the current supported protocol with MSRP should > > > just work. This is also how the user would expect the chat room to > > > work. Collisions between nicknames among chat rooms are expected by > the > > > user of the traditional client. The "Operator" in one room may not > be > > > that same person as the "Operator" in another. The client could > connect > > > to the focus requesting privacy. The conference package requires > the > > > focus to generate a unique username inside the focus' domain which > will > > > be the routable address (skipping the .invalid part of the spec.). > The > > > initial ephemeral nickname could be the same as the generated > username, > > > but the participant can replace it using the proposed SetNickname > method > > > in MSRP. > > > > > > If you require a persistent nickname that doesn't collide with > nicknames > > > in other conferences, you can upgrade to an XCON client supporting > rich > > > conferencing. > > > > I guess it is perhaps reasonable that you must support XCON to get > > persistent nicknames. > > > > But this must interoperate with simple users of the same conference > that > > don't support XCON. > > The rich client would have to support ephemeral nicknames, and it would > interoperate. The legacy clients would not see the persistent nicknames > though. > > > Its also my opinion that the scoping of persistent nicknames should > not > > necessarily correlate with conference server operators. That is why I > > think nicknames (at least persistent ones) should contain a scope. > > > > Specifically, you and I might both be participating in a conference > > hosted by an ietf server. My nickname might be scoped to aol.com and > > yours might be scoped to msn.com. (However this is probably still > > debatable - it blurs the line between what is a nickname and what is > an > > AOR.) > > This is exactly what I meant by persistent nicknames. Still I'm not > sure my definition really qualifies as a nickname. > > > > It can set both the persistent and the ephemeral nicknames > > > using CCMP. The persistent nickname would be an associated AOR to > the > > > user element in the XCON data model. Instead of distributing an > > > anonymous AOR, the focus will use the received persistent nickname > AOR > > > having a nickname based . The client would need to > juggle > > > the persistent nickname AOR, the persistent nickname > and > > > the ephemeral nickname supported by legacy clients. If you > persistent > > > nickname AOR is "nicky@aol.com" having the of "Nicky" > and > > > the ephemeral nickname would be "treehugger", the client could > render > > > the following complete nickname: "Nicky (treehugger)". You avoid > > > collision as another "Nicky" nicky@example.org" would need to select > > > another ephemeral nickname like "Nicky (beerlover)". > > > > I'm not quite following you. I don't understand the same participant > > having both an ephemeral and a persistent nickname. I find that very > > confusing and illogical. > > Seemed like a good idea at the time :-) > > > Isn't it sufficient that nicky@aol.com is different from > > nicky@example.org? If both are present then the client would render > the > > domain portion to resolve the ambiguity. > > I hoped that the nickname could be simpler than the AOR associated to > the participant. That's one of the reasons I proposed always supporting > ephemeral nicknames - being unique inside a conference, but very simple. > This would make it possible to write only the ephemeral nickname to send > a private message. > > Thanks, > Geir Arne > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Sun Jan 06 23:47:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjtF-0002Ea-Vo; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:47:09 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjtE-0002BT-30 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:47:08 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjtD-0002BL-PU for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:47:07 -0500 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.183]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjtD-00067l-Ek for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:47:07 -0500 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x19so3710252pyg.24 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:47:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=gJtJSe2TxVA7UDtTXOrzNBMJSTkvwkt5ubmvsUbWp2g=; b=iOxrvFxCAun60RtegsFAbP7xK7OIDfP1Y0/k0VcY5oQBHElAbRJ1NLZk91JExHC+yp01wWRcs5iY5kf9GnvHMdhszivwcMKze2OHC4XWCcGzIendWtFi+YhkAowmv7VlNi2P68pItyaEzGiJqJl1eMz2xcR/aD7fiCHl1j9OQU4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=tFFEjkVtsMOcbrhihCh9OgOis7P4CWtS3ZvGo4dHRDjvccq1FisnutiSkOgXPjtfmRKVoQeN8o2pU61ZUj2DuCLET/p34MarU671zSigOSuQrUwnDrb28RIwxEnBupk2SKcQ24TfelJDazpaV4Rg72pyrQvwLOrrUUyCrIutA3w= Received: by 10.65.83.18 with SMTP id k18mr41410326qbl.10.1199681225971; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:47:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.143.1 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 20:47:05 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <66cd252f0801062047v21f91e41r67c9d33a7afd662f@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:47:05 +1100 From: "Hisham Khartabil" To: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DABAD@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DABAD@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I think the nickname string should be unique. If it is left to the application to decide how to distiquish between identical nicknames, then users will have trouble communicating. User1 to me is UserA to you is User to someone else. Also as I stated earlier, I think it should be unique per domain to mimic chat rooms of today (you log into a chat service and create a nickname, and then join chat rooms). Hisham On 06/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > I have seen three different scopes from the discussions on the list: > 1. Chat room scope: chat32@focus.example.org or chat32.focus.example.org > 2. Chat server or focus scope: focus.example.org > 3. Domain: example.org > > This tells me is that it is not the nickname that needs to be a URI, but > the scope of the nickname. > > What if we extended the conference package to include: > 1. A nickname string > 2. A nickname scope URI > > We do not require the nickname string to be unique, but the combination > of the nickname and scope URI. > > We could require the MSRP NICKNAME method to support scoping from the > start: > Set-Nickname: nicky chat32@focus.example.org > Set-Nickname: nicky focus.example.org > Set-Nickname: nicky example.org > > If we still have to construct a SIP URI from the nickname string and the > nickname scope URI, multiple methods has been proposed on the list. > > Geir Arne > > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Sun Jan 06 23:52:16 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjy7-0007vO-RH; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:52:11 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjy5-0007vI-VE for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:52:09 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjy5-0007vA-LT for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:52:09 -0500 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.177]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBjy5-0006Ag-BF for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 23:52:09 -0500 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x19so3711548pyg.24 for ; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:52:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=IeB3dC1hgHeJEBhdqlpIJmpr6ni3fxOy8y2czldwJk8=; b=P8zs3CQ12ky8qHnlAFfnA1iEjknseJCWp0PkcJQ4gIHBZvFEYRvCytKEiOq7lTA1Hr+byqCwitrhZgaTDycBwBDFkWWCcEE/1ayJAXEv+9lL/8gUoCFewXpKsG1CehPTvkTXtNnWqRzS9htvb4aTdUiTfmeBG4q2wvVrb2SRRLI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NM/Jte5oFnNQCwzBNoR53OE67f+APCap0XZRILutbvhC+XJKQS/rH6pXFqXITatOYbMV0+YMUSimVPOdleB5um0nWiaqpFKyYZFg9I/icPHfKVY4DOhB72kq+s4Ea6p5HKoppU+JgKzwc0HKMIX88Fr+25ySyLzT9ZLmR3+Eokc= Received: by 10.65.224.11 with SMTP id b11mr41327462qbr.93.1199681528338; Sun, 06 Jan 2008 20:52:08 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.143.1 with HTTP; Sun, 6 Jan 2008 20:52:08 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <66cd252f0801062052v3a8862bcg2b9158e14187c0b3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:52:08 +1100 From: "Hisham Khartabil" To: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DABAC@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DABAC@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) using my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside the chatroom focus. Hisham On 06/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > Being a lazy programmer I am concerned about later part of the following > sentence in the current chat draft: > > "In this case the sender creates an MSRP SEND request with a > Message/CPIM body whose To or Cc headers contain not the chat room URI > but one or more nickname URIs or participant URIs." > > If I want to send a private message to a user of the conference, which > URI should I choose? Should I chose the nickname URI or the participant > URI for the MSRP SEND request? What are the criteria for selecting > either? What do I do if a nickname URI corresponds to a participant URI > for another user? > > IMHO, the lazy programer would just stick with one. All users of the > conference must have a participant URI which is a SIP URI. It is > required to be unique, routable inside the conference and could be > routable outside the conference. It can be used to send a private > message in a conference using MSRP SEND using the MSRP switch, or out of > conference for any SIP request. > > If a user wants a specific AOR to be presented to the others as the > participant URI, we should just let the user do that. > > Geir Arne > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From IvaenglishRomano@stophazing.org Mon Jan 07 01:32:18 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBlX0-0004HL-C2; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 01:32:18 -0500 Received: from host196-242-dynamic.12-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([87.12.242.196] helo=pcmatteo) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBlWz-0006uc-U0; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 01:32:18 -0500 Received: from stairway by stophazing.org with SMTP id rGV6HuePvf for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 07:32:04 -0100 From: "Cassie Sumner" To: , Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBngz-0006l3-0p; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:50:45 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBngy-0006kn-5l for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:50:44 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBngx-0006kf-SI for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:50:43 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBngx-00011Y-6V for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 03:50:43 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m078ofn0001920; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 09:50:41 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 09:50:41 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 09:50:40 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DAC72@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <66cd252f0801062047v21f91e41r67c9d33a7afd662f@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchQ6GSeBvKhECOyR1m5NnQ0JvBISQAHrPgg From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Hisham Khartabil" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2008 08:50:41.0388 (UTC) FILETIME=[61E37AC0:01C8510A] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d185fa790257f526fedfd5d01ed9c976 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org > From: Hisham Khartabil [mailto:hisham.khartabil@gmail.com] >=20 > I think the nickname string should be unique. If it is left to the > application to decide how to distiquish between identical nicknames, > then users will have trouble communicating. User1 to me is UserA to > you is User to someone else. >=20 > Also as I stated earlier, I think it should be unique per domain to > mimic chat rooms of today (you log into a chat service and create a > nickname, and then join chat rooms). The current chat draft doesn't require the user part of the nickname URI to be unique inside a conference, and no one has really proposes to render the domain part of it to make it so. That would probably violate what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering mechanisms has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). What I propose is to extend the uniqueness to be at an URI level, and not a domain level to include chat room scoping. =20 Here is a simple use case: Alice and Bob have an MSRP session. Alice includes Carol, and Alice's SIP contact header changes to include the isfocus feature-tag. Now Alice is running a chat room, and she can provision nicknames to be used in it. The nicknames are scoped by Alice's chat room URI, and not limited to her domain. She might not be authorized to provision nicknames from her domain. If the participants of her chat still want to have their nicknames scope at a domain level, they still can. This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of the winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the beertasters-chat@example.org. It doesn't stop president@example.org or president@whitehouse.gov to join the chat. The UI still has to cope having multiple presidents. Thanks, Geir Arne >=20 > Hisham >=20 > On 06/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > I have seen three different scopes from the discussions on the list: > > 1. Chat room scope: chat32@focus.example.org or chat32.focus.example.org > > 2. Chat server or focus scope: focus.example.org > > 3. Domain: example.org > > > > This tells me is that it is not the nickname that needs to be a URI, but > > the scope of the nickname. > > > > What if we extended the conference package to include: > > 1. A nickname string > > 2. A nickname scope URI > > > > We do not require the nickname string to be unique, but the combination > > of the nickname and scope URI. > > > > We could require the MSRP NICKNAME method to support scoping from the > > start: > > Set-Nickname: nicky chat32@focus.example.org > > Set-Nickname: nicky focus.example.org > > Set-Nickname: nicky example.org > > > > If we still have to construct a SIP URI from the nickname string and the > > nickname scope URI, multiple methods has been proposed on the list. > > > > Geir Arne > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Simple mailing list > > Simple@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 07 04:09:04 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBnyc-0004Dk-HX; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:08:58 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBnyb-0004Df-DE for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:08:57 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBnyb-0004DX-1B for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:08:57 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBnya-0001GH-AB for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 04:08:56 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0798rsb004981; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:08:54 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:08:39 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 10:08:38 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DAC94@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <66cd252f0801062052v3a8862bcg2b9158e14187c0b3@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Thread-Index: AchQ6RnsNbv+NfM7Qoe7SHkVl+sPUAAIdeWA From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Hisham Khartabil" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Jan 2008 09:08:39.0386 (UTC) FILETIME=[E46CEBA0:01C8510C] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e8a67952aa972b528dd04570d58ad8fe Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Hisham, Comments inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Hisham Khartabil [mailto:hisham.khartabil@gmail.com] >=20 > I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and > prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) using > my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside the > chatroom focus. The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. Why do we need another unique SIP URI to route the messages distributed by the MSRP switch? How do I choose which URI to use?=20 If I want to start a private sidebar audio session with another participant, I would use the participant URI. Why is private chat message any different? Thanks, Geir Arne > On 06/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > Being a lazy programmer I am concerned about later part of the following > > sentence in the current chat draft: > > > > "In this case the sender creates an MSRP SEND request with a > > Message/CPIM body whose To or Cc headers contain not the chat room URI > > but one or more nickname URIs or participant URIs." > > > > If I want to send a private message to a user of the conference, which > > URI should I choose? Should I chose the nickname URI or the participant > > URI for the MSRP SEND request? What are the criteria for selecting > > either? What do I do if a nickname URI corresponds to a participant URI > > for another user? > > > > IMHO, the lazy programer would just stick with one. All users of the > > conference must have a participant URI which is a SIP URI. It is > > required to be unique, routable inside the conference and could be > > routable outside the conference. It can be used to send a private > > message in a conference using MSRP SEND using the MSRP switch, or out of > > conference for any SIP request. > > > > If a user wants a specific AOR to be presented to the others as the > > participant URI, we should just let the user do that. > > > > Geir Arne > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Simple mailing list > > Simple@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 07 05:06:39 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBosG-0001N4-VE; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 05:06:28 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBosF-0001Mx-Ft for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 05:06:27 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBosE-0001Mp-Rl for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 05:06:27 -0500 Received: from node05.dns-hosting.info ([85.17.186.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBosD-00021C-4a for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 05:06:26 -0500 Received: from 5571fc03.ftth.concepts.nl ([85.113.252.3] helo=[192.168.1.202]) by node05.dns-hosting.info with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JBosB-0000tP-F8 for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 11:06:23 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753) In-Reply-To: <2947FBCC-5BA7-4832-A79E-58E6B7C4E66D@cisco.com> References: <8983EC086A9D954BA74D9763E853CF3E045A3F6A@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> <200712121555.38264.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> <476069CC.6000707@cisco.com> <8053C665-4A8D-456C-9F3E-07AAC55FFEA1@nostrum.com> <2947FBCC-5BA7-4832-A79E-58E6B7C4E66D@cisco.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <0165AFD4-7B34-4331-A85C-409EC8DFF83F@ag-projects.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Ruud Klaver Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 11:06:18 +0100 To: simple@ietf.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 85.113.252.3 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ruud@ag-projects.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on node05.dns-hosting.info X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, DNS_FROM_RFC_BOGUSMX autolearn=no version=3.2.3 Subject: Re: [Simple] MSRP congestion control issue when using relays X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:39:36 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on node05.dns-hosting.info) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 92df29fa99cf13e554b84c8374345c17 X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Hi, Thank you both for the replies. On Jan 3, 2008, at 12:00 AM, Cullen Jennings wrote: > > There are two models to implement a relay .... > > One is the infinite storage model. This is the easiest one to do > and more or less solves the congestion issues. Some people find the > infinite storage is available assumption to be very reasonable (I > think Rohan is in that camp) and some find it to be so totally > insane it makes our heads explode ( suspect Adam might be in that > camp ). I'm afraid that, as an implementor, I am firmly in the explosion camp. > The other model is the pipes model. If you have data coming in on > pipe A and it needs to be copied to pipe B, then you read very > slowly off pipe A as long as pipe B is congested and rely on TCP > push-back. To make this not have HOL blocking problems, you need to > buffer at least the chunk size and you need to control the kernel > buffer sizes. You also needs some sane assumptions about the ratio > of the slow pipe to size the kernel buffers and the amount of time > before message from pipe C that goes to B can get interrupt the > message from A. I imagine a nice masters these could be written on > this. You are going too fast for my slow and explosion-prone brain. Are you talking about session sharing on these TCP connections or not? If so, how will this prevent HOL blocking issues exactly? What do you mean by chunk size? If I want to send someone a DVD (not an uncommon scenario) I will attempt to send one chunk of 4.4GB. > My memory is the spec allows either of these models to work but > does not really describe how to implement either of them. If all > you are doing is IM, well infinite storage may work while if you > are doing file transfer, the pipe model might be more appealing. > > Cullen I don't think there is anything that prevents users from doing file transfers over relays that were designed just for IM. > On Dec 13, 2007, at 12:46 PM, Robert Sparks wrote: > >> My memory (after dredging it for a few days) recalls that we ended >> up with agreement that there were many ways to handle these kinds >> of problems and that we would develop some experience around them. >> Having one connection between relays was something explicitly >> agreed to. Relays were expected to have significant, but not >> infinite storage, and how the relay chose to manage that resource >> was its own business. >> >> IIRC the question on having a slow outgoing leg back up the >> incoming legs was put down when we realized the relay can just >> close that outgoing leg and tell the incoming side of whatever was >> going down that outgoing leg that the session's over. Other >> existing sessions coming through those incoming pipes and going >> down other outgoing pipes won't be affected. (Rohan - you may want >> to chime in here). >> >> RjS >> So a session will receive the death sentence just for being significantly slower than the rest? Neat, I want to implement that on our roads. Ruud Klaver _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From IsraeltrenchantFrancis@hampshireillinois.com Mon Jan 07 08:19:05 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBrsf-00083C-MW; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 08:19:05 -0500 Received: from host223-249-dynamic.23-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([79.23.249.223] helo=daniele62247f1.homenet.telecomitalia.it) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBrsf-0007Cf-2O; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 08:19:05 -0500 Received: from bewhisker by hampshireillinois.com with SMTP id L1SHHE7WYm for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:18:40 -0100 From: "Gregg Maldonado" To: Subject: If you're in the US or anywhere else, join your new casino paradise. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Our casino is for you and everyone else who likes to win! We give out BONUSES to anyone who joins. We give out BONUSES to anyone who joins. When YOU WIN, we win! http://worldpcasino.com.cn/ From abarth@loansmortgagehome.com Mon Jan 07 10:19:31 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBtlD-0006vN-Lp; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 10:19:31 -0500 Received: from cpe-65-24-64-137.columbus.res.rr.com ([65.24.64.137] helo=Betty.columbus.rr.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBtlB-0001VG-DJ; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 10:19:30 -0500 Received: from [65.24.64.137] by smtp.secureserver.net; Mon, 6 Jan 2008 10:18:20 -0500 From: "Craig Mahoney" To: Subject: Spot Light Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2008 10:18:20 -0500 Message-ID: <01c8504d$75da3e00$89401841@abarth> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 We have Many types of med s We stock Hard to Find ones http://cphestpptmrb.googlepages.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 07 14:13:22 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBxPP-0000hN-TU; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:13:15 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JBxPN-0000Rv-TW for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:13:13 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBxPN-0000Qy-6S for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:13:13 -0500 Received: from estacado-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net ([2001:470:1f03:266::2] helo=estacado.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JBxPK-0006ov-JP for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:13:13 -0500 Received: from [172.17.1.65] ([172.17.1.65]) (authenticated bits=0) by estacado.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m07JD9rW079985 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:13:09 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@estacado.net) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753) To: simple mailing list Message-Id: From: Robert Sparks Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:13:05 -0600 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753) X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465 Subject: [Simple] WGLC: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-03.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1960047452==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org --===============1960047452== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-54-235170154 --Apple-Mail-54-235170154 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed This is a SIMPLE Working Group Last Call for Comments on http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-interdomain- scaling-analysis-03.txt Please review this draft carefully. Provide comments to the editor and/or the list no later than Monday 21 January 2008. Thanks, RjS --Apple-Mail-54-235170154 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII This is a SIMPLE Working Group = Last Call for Comments on

Please review this draft carefully. Provide comments = to the editor and/or the list no later than
Monday = 21 January 2008.


Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Fg-0002tT-4b; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:15:24 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Fe-0002tJ-6x for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:15:22 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Fd-0002tA-TV for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:15:21 -0500 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.179]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Fc-0001l2-6F for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:15:21 -0500 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x19so4076849pyg.24 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:15:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=z22EaA0o8Q85rWaOKPTnCFcpxJG1UMVgmyWIlru/JyM=; b=YdYask53xH632m7TFVA2k/AuDEqpRmukyWydh0Jm7eo+kl9c+L7sIkwJp6KwDao/j5vAFJ3j1DlUL0t20cKkycH/DbJpWvuoPH7gqvFGZYWSRzAn4YAd8VKiAav3yVl0DWHNRo5CcjMCi/IoGo0EIORAC3Bq4cw9EudKDj5kuww= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UwvVAllzB6Nac/Qsobi8q9nzJg5KxNL6aa+nXKIFXaEV/lNh0Tnnm06WQ08v6L5bCSjijraTHicoufYm8JvVxaJntScPpZUNebraO6KVHBMI5mJgH/sMSbxK551J2XB3fTFxlqB3Zv3FhHzNn3HbgweBvFX1PvRdf9jGH7tazKA= Received: by 10.65.114.11 with SMTP id r11mr26725472qbm.72.1199744119395; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:15:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.143.1 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:15:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <66cd252f0801071415p2b1d61cfr221f114f8a4fa929@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 09:15:19 +1100 From: "Hisham Khartabil" To: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DAC72@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <66cd252f0801062047v21f91e41r67c9d33a7afd662f@mail.gmail.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DAC72@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 944ecb6e61f753561f559a497458fb4f Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org On 07/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > From: Hisham Khartabil [mailto:hisham.khartabil@gmail.com] > > > > I think the nickname string should be unique. If it is left to the > > application to decide how to distiquish between identical nicknames, > > then users will have trouble communicating. User1 to me is UserA to > > you is User to someone else. > > > > Also as I stated earlier, I think it should be unique per domain to > > mimic chat rooms of today (you log into a chat service and create a > > nickname, and then join chat rooms). > > The current chat draft doesn't require the user part of the nickname URI > to be unique inside a conference, and no one has really proposes to > render the domain part of it to make it so. I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of 2 participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the application to distinguish them for the user. The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the chatroom service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. > That would probably violate > what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering mechanisms > has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the application? I think not. > > What I propose is to extend the uniqueness to be at an URI level, and > not a domain level to include chat room scoping. > > Here is a simple use case: Alice and Bob have an MSRP session. Alice > includes Carol, and Alice's SIP contact header changes to include the > isfocus feature-tag. Now Alice is running a chat room, and she can > provision nicknames to be used in it. The nicknames are scoped by > Alice's chat room URI, and not limited to her domain. She might not be > authorized to provision nicknames from her domain. If the participants > of her chat still want to have their nicknames scope at a domain level, > they still can. > > This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of the > winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > beertasters-chat@example.org. Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been a while though). There were a few people against what you just proposed due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. Hisham > It doesn't stop president@example.org or > president@whitehouse.gov to join the chat. The UI still has to cope > having multiple presidents. > > Thanks, > Geir Arne > > > > > Hisham > > > > On 06/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken > wrote: > > > I have seen three different scopes from the discussions on the list: > > > 1. Chat room scope: chat32@focus.example.org or > chat32.focus.example.org > > > 2. Chat server or focus scope: focus.example.org > > > 3. Domain: example.org > > > > > > This tells me is that it is not the nickname that needs to be a URI, > but > > > the scope of the nickname. > > > > > > What if we extended the conference package to include: > > > 1. A nickname string > > > 2. A nickname scope URI > > > > > > We do not require the nickname string to be unique, but the > combination > > > of the nickname and scope URI. > > > > > > We could require the MSRP NICKNAME method to support scoping from > the > > > start: > > > Set-Nickname: nicky chat32@focus.example.org > > > Set-Nickname: nicky focus.example.org > > > Set-Nickname: nicky example.org > > > > > > If we still have to construct a SIP URI from the nickname string and > the > > > nickname scope URI, multiple methods has been proposed on the list. > > > > > > Geir Arne > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Simple mailing list > > > Simple@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 07 17:17:39 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Hp-0005IC-0U; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:17:37 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Hn-0005Au-48 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:17:35 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Hm-0005Ah-QP for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:17:34 -0500 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.176]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0Hl-0001oX-Kh for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:17:34 -0500 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x19so4077583pyg.24 for ; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:17:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=w3LYEwSMwoxMmv5cwh9SSC4ChHzCEoOnEHi9hv9hQLE=; b=Ytt4EsuKQbOksM/ITl0WbrH4pveTCYmqlNAA2uV/Z5oiw3kfsEHAuS5FM1lm6M4WB+LA36DEDLWbNJ6Xyw+0DfYg9XgWVZst3g4dcbI34duSfChAlC+jCw2A3jE3Er5diax+ccLN6U/uPvvHOHDN6wD2ojELpJSbDLyorX8UJi4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=R4yrTxS0py/dPOdMpCpvf3nJdPtwuq3JMyuBxsNrKvg2ZRh2uTal37vMWr0A86fk3eJpLOy2snESaUpKp8cHoSdalqq53+gAcw3yRqZCGUVuFQ7y+Ptv1lEuFf4ZM2kukVqa5Vp3Lp06SXcwelXFBG0Y0J40kbOaOGltK/k9n1E= Received: by 10.65.152.17 with SMTP id e17mr6405102qbo.14.1199744252627; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:17:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.143.1 with HTTP; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:17:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <66cd252f0801071417y1af84515qd1a29e58d262a75d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 09:17:32 +1100 From: "Hisham Khartabil" To: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DAC94@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <66cd252f0801062052v3a8862bcg2b9158e14187c0b3@mail.gmail.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DAC94@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d0bdc596f8dd1c226c458f0b4df27a88 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org On 07/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > Hisham, > > Comments inline. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Hisham Khartabil [mailto:hisham.khartabil@gmail.com] > > > > I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and > > prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) using > > my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside the > > chatroom focus. > > The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. No it doesn't need to be unique. Anonymous means you cannot reach me if you use this SIP URI. Hisham > Why do > we need another unique SIP URI to route the messages distributed by the > MSRP switch? How do I choose which URI to use? > > If I want to start a private sidebar audio session with another > participant, I would use the participant URI. Why is private chat > message any different? > > Thanks, > Geir Arne > > > On 06/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken > wrote: > > > Being a lazy programmer I am concerned about later part of the > following > > > sentence in the current chat draft: > > > > > > "In this case the sender creates an MSRP SEND request with a > > > Message/CPIM body whose To or Cc headers contain not the chat room > URI > > > but one or more nickname URIs or participant URIs." > > > > > > If I want to send a private message to a user of the conference, > which > > > URI should I choose? Should I chose the nickname URI or the > participant > > > URI for the MSRP SEND request? What are the criteria for selecting > > > either? What do I do if a nickname URI corresponds to a participant > URI > > > for another user? > > > > > > IMHO, the lazy programer would just stick with one. All users of > the > > > conference must have a participant URI which is a SIP URI. It is > > > required to be unique, routable inside the conference and could be > > > routable outside the conference. It can be used to send a private > > > message in a conference using MSRP SEND using the MSRP switch, or > out of > > > conference for any SIP request. > > > > > > If a user wants a specific AOR to be presented to the others as the > > > participant URI, we should just let the user do that. > > > > > > Geir Arne > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Simple mailing list > > > Simple@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From ElisaparaffinArellano@stevengerrard.net Mon Jan 07 17:29:45 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0TY-0000Uh-Lb; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:29:44 -0500 Received: from e180027076.adsl.alicedsl.de ([85.180.27.76] helo=your117a1a6435) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC0TT-0000fS-Cw; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:29:42 -0500 Received: from limb by stevengerrard.net with SMTP id KBWCk3Rffi for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 23:28:24 -0100 From: "Tami Jaramillo" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC3Xg-0000Tf-T1; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:46:12 -0500 Received: from [190.86.26.237] (helo=equipo15) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC3Xg-0004yi-7T; Mon, 07 Jan 2008 20:46:12 -0500 Received: from freest by dreamhosters.com with SMTP id ETqRkYiSe6 for ; Mon, 7 Jan 2008 19:45:57 +0600 From: "Tessa Ouellette" To: Subject: Get your bonus and walk the red carpet to winnings and fun. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Free money free fun. Huge progressive jackpots, slots, multi-hand, and single-hand blackjack. Our casino is for you and everyone else who likes to win! Travel no further than your screen and get your free $2400 http://joemcasino.com/ From ffryjponvb@borriups.com Tue Jan 08 00:39:05 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC7B3-000171-73 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:39:05 -0500 Received: from cm19.kappa244.maxonline.com.sg ([58.182.244.19]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC7B0-0000qW-5Y for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:39:03 -0500 Received: from [58.182.244.19] by newmail-g1.xinnetdns.com; Tue, 7 Jan 2008 13:44:36 +0800 From: "Ricky Steiner" To: Subject: Steiner Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2008 13:44:36 +0800 Message-ID: <01c85133$70efba00$13f4b63a@ffryjponvb> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.2663 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.4 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea We sell only FDA prescription medications through our licensed pharmacy. All orders are overseen by our licensed accredited physicians. http://x3qe1a.bay.livefilestore.com/y1prynXfCXKhvr07lNF-857k1kXxx7NJjgtibqwffv8kMnuFTAM1OkhQdnl2Dmq7yYrME6vR4oeiHNETVDldfPsXqDIRlzyja6o/euxxtpeey.html FOS with reference is so often misunderstood, for your kids if you that your complaint better at solving software in preschool From rim@brainmetric.com Tue Jan 08 01:45:01 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC8Cr-0003mG-IN; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:45:01 -0500 Received: from [88.240.94.11] (helo=[88.240.94.11]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC8Cq-0001xM-CI; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 01:45:01 -0500 Received: from [88.240.94.11] by mx2.hrnoc.net; Tue, 7 Jan 2008 08:41:51 +0200 From: "Luther Morgan" To: Subject: Boy Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2008 08:41:51 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: Aca6QVL5V63ZPSU0BR0HD5ZUK9C901== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 Message-ID: <01c85109$25c0b180$0b5ef058@rim> X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 7aefe408d50e9c7c47615841cb314bed Look at our US FDA prescription medication through our licensed pharmacy. All orders are overseen by licensed accredited medical team. http://www.healthkindom.com complaint about Most importantly, on the floor with I can only make neurobiology, cognitive But so does living From aoessovd@bnea-yml.adsteam.com.au Tue Jan 08 02:20:34 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC8lG-0006VQ-5i; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 02:20:34 -0500 Received: from [211.104.80.253] (helo=[211.104.80.253]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC8lE-0002eV-TM; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 02:20:33 -0500 Received: from [211.104.80.253] by oberon.tpgi.com.au; Tue, 7 Jan 2008 16:20:33 +0900 From: "Megan Dugan" To: Subject: Re: Megan Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2008 16:20:33 +0900 Message-ID: <01c85149$3a249e80$fd5068d3@aoessovd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 1.9 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 No more worries, men! Medical professionals have endorsed the HerbalMaxx system to help men just like you achieve increased SIZE, LENGTH and WIDTH of their Manhood http://dieuhhe.com From WardlemuelNoble@newsday.com Tue Jan 08 03:24:23 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC9l0-0002Nq-Sv; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 03:24:22 -0500 Received: from pd9e09ff4.dip.t-dialin.net ([217.224.159.244] helo=koenig.speedportw700v) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JC9ky-0003uB-GY; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 03:24:20 -0500 Received: from mythology by newsday.com with SMTP id 6YMCvyTK4S for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 09:24:14 -0100 From: "Dion Bauer" To: Cc: , Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCBUd-0008Ai-GW; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:15:35 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCBUb-0008Ac-EF for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:15:33 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCBUb-000879-2N for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:15:33 -0500 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.122.233] helo=mgw-mx06.nokia.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCBUa-0006Xq-9N for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:15:32 -0500 Received: from esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh108.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.145]) by mgw-mx06.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id m08AF2ou015479; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:15:28 +0200 Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by esebh108.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:15:28 +0200 Received: from esdhcp041225.research.nokia.com ([172.21.41.225]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:15:27 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?q?R=E9mi_Denis-Courmont?= Organization: Nokia TP-SP-SWD To: simple@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Simple] MSRP congestion control issue when using relays Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:16:12 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <8983EC086A9D954BA74D9763E853CF3E045A3F6A@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> <8053C665-4A8D-456C-9F3E-07AAC55FFEA1@nostrum.com> <2947FBCC-5BA7-4832-A79E-58E6B7C4E66D@cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <2947FBCC-5BA7-4832-A79E-58E6B7C4E66D@cisco.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801081216.12684.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 10:15:27.0867 (UTC) FILETIME=[641454B0:01C851DF] X-Nokia-AV: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7aafa0432175920a4b3e118e16c5cb64 Cc: ext Cullen Jennings X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Le Thursday 03 January 2008 01:00:46 ext Cullen Jennings, vous avez =E9crit= =A0: > There are two models to implement a relay .... > > One is the infinite storage model. This is the easiest one to do and > more or less solves the congestion issues. Some people find the > infinite storage is available assumption to be very reasonable (I > think Rohan is in that camp) and some find it to be so totally insane > it makes our heads explode ( suspect Adam might be in that camp ). Infinite storage works for small messages. In a sense, that's what XMPP and= =20 even SIP itself, do. That's also what SMTP does, and may partially account= =20 for SMTP servers refusing to relay overly large emails. Unfortunately, where MSRP is envisioned as a file transfer protocol rather= =20 than only an IM protocol, this fails. It was pointed out to me that XMPP=20 in-band file transfer probably has the same problem - lets not blame only=20 MSRP. > The other model is the pipes model. If you have data coming in on > pipe A and it needs to be copied to pipe B, then you read very slowly > off pipe A as long as pipe B is congested and rely on TCP push-back. > To make this not have HOL blocking problems, you need to buffer at > least the chunk size and you need to control the kernel buffer sizes. > You also needs some sane assumptions about the ratio of the slow pipe > to size the kernel buffers and the amount of time before message from > pipe C that goes to B can get interrupt the message from A. I imagine > a nice masters these could be written on this. The only way to solve HOL is for the receiver to drop packets coming from=20 upstream that would overflow the queue to downstream. Because MSRP has no w= ay=20 to signal transient congestion of a single session when multiple sessions a= re=20 multiplexed over the same TCP connection. > My memory is the spec allows either of these models to work but does > not really describe how to implement either of them. If all you are > doing is IM, well infinite storage may work while if you are doing > file transfer, the pipe model might be more appealing. My understanding is that model one works if file transfers are banned, and = the=20 second model does not work at all because MSRP is missing critical pieces f= or=20 such a model to work (i.e. any way to signal congestion on per MSRP session= =20 rather than per TCP session). =2D-=20 R=E9mi Denis-Courmont _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From AnibalgaltDale@milmag.com Tue Jan 08 05:40:38 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCBsr-00046M-W4; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:40:38 -0500 Received: from [88.241.136.95] (helo=depo) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCBsp-00072W-CO; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 05:40:35 -0500 Received: from igneous by milmag.com with SMTP id GmE0tZox3r for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:39:45 -0200 From: "Anibal Dale" To: , Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCCGw-00006M-Ij; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:05:30 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCCGv-00006F-8r for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:05:29 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCCGu-000067-VQ for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:05:28 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCCGu-0005Zu-FJ for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:05:28 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m08B5NbI010206; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:05:24 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:05:23 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:05:22 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB02A@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <66cd252f0801071417y1af84515qd1a29e58d262a75d@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Thread-Index: AchReyR5RucOdwsrS+midRLPBZc8+gAXA+wg From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Hisham Khartabil" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 11:05:23.0441 (UTC) FILETIME=[5D94A610:01C851E6] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org > > > [snip snip] > > > I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and > > > prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) using > > > my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside the > > > chatroom focus. > > > > The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. >=20 > No it doesn't need to be unique. Anonymous means you cannot reach me > if you use this SIP URI. The conference package states that the focus has to construct the user part of anonymous entity URI to be unique among all participants of the same domain. If it can't be used as a routable address inside the scope of the conference, we need to construct one for reasons described below. A requirement for a nickname is that it can be changed by a participant at any time during a conference. Having a routable address just change will lead to race conditions and other problems. This is especially important for protocols like MSRP where you can chunk large messages like files. You could try to mend the problem by adding some hefty semantics to the focus and/or MSRP switch, but that just makes my head spin. We need a single routable address associated to a participant as long as the participant is part of the conference.=20 Thanks, Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 08 06:59:10 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCD6Q-0001E3-Sc; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:58:42 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCD6P-0001Dy-HE for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:58:41 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCD6P-0001Dq-6E for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:58:41 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCD6O-0000rp-Gu for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 06:58:41 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m08BwXuM018187; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:58:34 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:58:33 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:58:32 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB045@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <66cd252f0801071415p2b1d61cfr221f114f8a4fa929@mail.gmail.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchRetYygnWFMDuSQ96jhMhXTXOxVgAa46sg From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Hisham Khartabil" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 11:58:33.0919 (UTC) FILETIME=[CB40F4F0:01C851ED] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Comments inline. > > [snip snip] > > render the domain part of it to make it so. >=20 > I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of 2 > participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the > application to distinguish them for the user. >=20 > The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the chatroom > service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to be inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason for this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the clients acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside a domain complicates the implementation of the server. > > That would probably violate > > what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering mechanisms > > has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). >=20 > Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the application? I > think not. I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested method to avoid having to render a nickname like this: nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com > [snip snip] >=20 > This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of the > > winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > > beertasters-chat@example.org. >=20 > Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been a > while though). There were a few people against what you just proposed > due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both > chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the UI would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? =20 Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From pbailey@andersonandblack.com Tue Jan 08 08:46:53 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCEn7-0001mV-29; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:46:53 -0500 Received: from [89.123.85.249] (helo=[89.123.85.249]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCEn4-0003u0-07; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 08:46:50 -0500 Received: from [89.123.85.249] by MAIL.andersonandblack.com; Tue, 7 Jan 2008 15:45:44 +0200 From: "Jarrod Bailey" To: Subject: Foot Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2008 15:45:44 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85144$5d008400$f9557b59@pbailey> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 We sell only fda prescription medications through our fully licensed pharmacy. orders are overseen by licensed accredited medical network. http://dhcmxpqekpue.googlepages.com From DiannaillumineHairston@mcall.com Tue Jan 08 09:33:53 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCFWb-00081A-6h; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:33:53 -0500 Received: from f049240146.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.49.240.146] helo=keinezd7ksb3rx) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCFWa-00053l-4k; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:33:53 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Rachael Kaplan" To: Cc: , =20
Your credit history = does not=20 matter to us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 want IMMEDIATE ready money to spend ANY way you like or want Extra money = to=20 give the company a boost or need A low interest loan - NO STRINGS = ATTACHED,=20 here is our best deal we can offer you TODAY (hurry, this lot will = expire=20 TONIGHT):
=20
 
$64,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when best deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply finish this easy form...
=20
 
Do not worry about = approval, your=20 your credit report will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://thedworld.net.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_AEF4_01C85203.710F8080-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 08 11:55:42 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCHjm-0003Wx-SJ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:55:38 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCHjl-0003Wp-Ea for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:55:37 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCHjl-0003Wg-2v for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:55:37 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-2-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.71] helo=sj-iport-2.cisco.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCHjk-0008FB-LS for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:55:37 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,258,1196668800"; d="scan'208";a="10527019" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2008 08:55:36 -0800 Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (sj-core-5.cisco.com [171.71.177.238]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m08GtZeT026837; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 08:55:35 -0800 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m08GtXFO019893; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:55:35 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:55:32 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.128] ([161.44.174.128]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:55:32 -0500 Message-ID: <4783AB06.6060808@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:55:34 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geir Arne Sandbakken Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB02A@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB02A@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 16:55:32.0548 (UTC) FILETIME=[47FBF840:01C85217] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1610; t=1199811335; x=1200675335; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Single=20routable=20address= 20in=20MSRP=20chat=20rooms |Sender:=20; bh=X4rp4JOTfYBu+slLAls8JunzxiQnAR+modp/KhzDLPM=; b=S3hzKeTOuu9xGGpcsckXQHdzhLfPiJ0UlmE0nJoLNMVXjHDdzQjZoCTzbs Mz0wjHOrfDaFUgEWMbx0r3QnG+K6hhihNfpLfUXIywYipkX8zm9J5SIp0qgG M1Xq1xWicg; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Comment at end. Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >>>> [snip snip] >>>> I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and >>>> prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) > using >>>> my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside the >>>> chatroom focus. >>> The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. >> No it doesn't need to be unique. Anonymous means you cannot reach me >> if you use this SIP URI. > > The conference package states that the focus has to construct the user > part of anonymous entity URI to be unique among all participants of the > same domain. If it can't be used as a routable address inside the scope > of the conference, we need to construct one for reasons described below. > > A requirement for a nickname is that it can be changed by a participant > at any time during a conference. Having a routable address just change > will lead to race conditions and other problems. This is especially > important for protocols like MSRP where you can chunk large messages > like files. You could try to mend the problem by adding some hefty > semantics to the focus and/or MSRP switch, but that just makes my head > spin. > > We need a single routable address associated to a participant as long as > the participant is part of the conference. Its my impression that one reason for changing nicknames is to appear to others as a different person, not correlated to the prior one. Of the routable address remains the same then it provides a means of correlation. Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From erling@schriks.com Tue Jan 08 12:57:49 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCIhx-0005Nn-CS; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:57:49 -0500 Received: from [92.81.87.223] (helo=[92.81.87.223]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCIhr-00019F-OX; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 12:57:44 -0500 Received: from [92.81.87.223] by mx3.bitrey.net; Tue, 7 Jan 2008 19:56:34 +0200 From: "Jacques Pendleton" To: Subject: Plane Meat Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2008 19:56:34 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85167$67aea800$df57515c@erling> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 No more worries, men! Medical professionals have endorsed the HerbalMaxx system to help men just like you achieve increased SIZE, LENGTH and WIDTH of their Manhood http://fuhqztdbirzf.googlepages.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 08 17:16:39 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCMjz-0004VD-H2; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:16:11 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCMjy-0004V3-Qk for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:16:10 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCMjy-0004Un-G2 for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:16:10 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCMjx-0001RF-Tk for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:16:10 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m08MFuwU003761; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:15:56 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:15:56 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:15:53 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB1CC@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <4783AB06.6060808@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Thread-Index: AchSF1UsXXKIJmEISIOy6JnKdQbQCgAK8oWA From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Paul Kyzivat" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2008 22:15:56.0085 (UTC) FILETIME=[0A1AEE50:01C85244] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52f7a77164458f8c7b36b66787c853da Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Comments at end. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > Sent: 08 January 2008 17:56 > To: Geir Arne Sandbakken > Cc: Hisham Khartabil; simple@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms >=20 > Comment at end. >=20 > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > >>>> [snip snip] > >>>> I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and > >>>> prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) > > using > >>>> my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside the > >>>> chatroom focus. > >>> The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. > >> No it doesn't need to be unique. Anonymous means you cannot reach me > >> if you use this SIP URI. > > > > The conference package states that the focus has to construct the user > > part of anonymous entity URI to be unique among all participants of the > > same domain. If it can't be used as a routable address inside the scope > > of the conference, we need to construct one for reasons described below. > > > > A requirement for a nickname is that it can be changed by a participant > > at any time during a conference. Having a routable address just change > > will lead to race conditions and other problems. This is especially > > important for protocols like MSRP where you can chunk large messages > > like files. You could try to mend the problem by adding some hefty > > semantics to the focus and/or MSRP switch, but that just makes my head > > spin. > > > > We need a single routable address associated to a participant as long as > > the participant is part of the conference. >=20 > Its my impression that one reason for changing nicknames is to appear to > others as a different person, not correlated to the prior one. Of the > routable address remains the same then it provides a means of correlation. I remember to have seen notifications in IRC when someone in the room changes their nickname. XMPP supports such notifications, but I don't know if they are typical. Having a teenager in the house I have seen quite some long and wired nicknames used in various IM systems, but their identity/address seems to be quite persistent. It also seems like the nicknames changes as the mood changes - which are quite often. Do we need to support stealth changes of nicknames? Thanks, Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 08 17:51:38 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCNI9-0002Cw-Ka; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:51:29 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCNI7-0002AV-JC for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:51:27 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCNI7-00028e-7R for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:51:27 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com ([171.71.176.117]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCNI6-0000YZ-TA for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:51:27 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,259,1196668800"; d="scan'208";a="32576973" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2008 14:51:26 -0800 Received: from sj-core-2.cisco.com (sj-core-2.cisco.com [171.71.177.254]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m08MpQVx027281; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:51:26 -0800 Received: from [128.107.139.232] (dhcp-128-107-139-232.cisco.com [128.107.139.232]) by sj-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m08MpQcV019337; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 22:51:26 GMT In-Reply-To: <200801081216.12684.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> References: <8983EC086A9D954BA74D9763E853CF3E045A3F6A@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> <8053C665-4A8D-456C-9F3E-07AAC55FFEA1@nostrum.com> <2947FBCC-5BA7-4832-A79E-58E6B7C4E66D@cisco.com> <200801081216.12684.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Cullen Jennings Subject: Re: [Simple] MSRP congestion control issue when using relays Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 14:51:21 -0800 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Denis-Courmont?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=739; t=1199832686; x=1200696686; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20MSRP=20congestion=20control= 20issue=20when=20using=20relays |Sender:=20; bh=1upOoaRVGcxK1qai99Slv8MNjYwVvHjf+yB4P8fsTdw=; b=cwEhd+N6OR66uKz/vR2RUWuUm8U6w4WP+vmAvxEUK9AZ0iKgSF6tcbkTVA yiFVkXlq3QQYXcdDiPTapN8WlGbnU1hgFZEBLOOgYqrhtQnpqjSxEUEijtB9 0tq5VotVu0; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org On Jan 8, 2008, at 2:16 AM, R=E9mi Denis-Courmont wrote: > > My understanding is that model one works if file transfers are =20 > banned, and the > second model does not work at all because MSRP is missing critical =20 > pieces for > such a model to work (i.e. any way to signal congestion on per MSRP =20= > session > rather than per TCP session). I don't think the critical pieces for this are missing. It signals it =20= on the TCP session level (using normal TCP push back) and then the =20 sender interrupts the current chunk and switches to other chunk. So =20 the multiplexing is at the MRSP sessions level but normal TCP =20 mechanisms are used to signal the feedback. Cullen _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From ElijahhandmadeAtkins@peopleagainstcedars.com Tue Jan 08 18:31:35 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCNux-0007fr-Fk; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:31:35 -0500 Received: from bl8-167-127.dsl.telepac.pt ([85.241.167.127] helo=fr.lan) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCNur-0002G4-1K; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:31:29 -0500 Received: from pathetic by peopleagainstcedars.com with SMTP id 5yb9vlvkJE for ; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:31:14 +0000 From: "Jerald Hogan" To: , Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOMj-0004Vr-4n; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:00:17 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOMh-0004Vm-4s for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:00:15 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOMg-0004Ve-RO for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:00:14 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOMg-0003UH-Bo for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:00:14 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,259,1196658000"; d="scan'208";a="82747653" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2008 19:00:14 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0900Ede006643; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:00:14 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m09005Gw010036; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 00:00:13 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:00:10 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.128] ([161.44.174.128]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 8 Jan 2008 19:00:10 -0500 Message-ID: <47840E8B.6080001@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:00:11 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geir Arne Sandbakken Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB1CC@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB1CC@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2008 00:00:10.0171 (UTC) FILETIME=[99D4B8B0:01C85252] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2672; t=1199836814; x=1200700814; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Single=20routable=20address= 20in=20MSRP=20chat=20rooms |Sender:=20 |To:=20Geir=20Arne=20Sandbakken=20; bh=uk3AMxSwZ51MfdldBrs+v1/C+XIhM7ckkUxP2h/jbGQ=; b=UzGufj57tL+YcBcyMqbYWN/vJ2ZCEQgKkeRJQvXUgsACCN5gC5smZQOM3H VMnVjoYnLdM+uPI9Uibr5gZhLhJgp48nyzIuXXJYxxcqOxrTY74D8LfQU8v5 Gj27Xh28Ro; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I'm a poor judge of what we need to support here. It sounds like there are nickname changes that don't expect anonymity, and some that do. Paul Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > Comments at end. > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> Sent: 08 January 2008 17:56 >> To: Geir Arne Sandbakken >> Cc: Hisham Khartabil; simple@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms >> >> Comment at end. >> >> Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >>>>>> [snip snip] >>>>>> I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and >>>>>> prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) >>> using >>>>>> my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside > the >>>>>> chatroom focus. >>>>> The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. >>>> No it doesn't need to be unique. Anonymous means you cannot reach > me >>>> if you use this SIP URI. >>> The conference package states that the focus has to construct the > user >>> part of anonymous entity URI to be unique among all participants of > the >>> same domain. If it can't be used as a routable address inside the > scope >>> of the conference, we need to construct one for reasons described > below. >>> A requirement for a nickname is that it can be changed by a > participant >>> at any time during a conference. Having a routable address just > change >>> will lead to race conditions and other problems. This is especially >>> important for protocols like MSRP where you can chunk large messages >>> like files. You could try to mend the problem by adding some hefty >>> semantics to the focus and/or MSRP switch, but that just makes my > head >>> spin. >>> >>> We need a single routable address associated to a participant as > long as >>> the participant is part of the conference. >> Its my impression that one reason for changing nicknames is to appear > to >> others as a different person, not correlated to the prior one. Of the >> routable address remains the same then it provides a means of > correlation. > > I remember to have seen notifications in IRC when someone in the room > changes their nickname. XMPP supports such notifications, but I don't > know if they are typical. Having a teenager in the house I have seen > quite some long and wired nicknames used in various IM systems, but > their identity/address seems to be quite persistent. It also seems like > the nicknames changes as the mood changes - which are quite often. > > Do we need to support stealth changes of nicknames? > > Thanks, > Geir Arne > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From maoistsr@cables2u.com Tue Jan 08 19:34:06 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOtS-0006kJ-Bf for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:34:06 -0500 Received: from [222.173.104.226] (helo=mail.evergreensf.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCOtR-00037I-6K; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 19:34:06 -0500 Received: from [222.173.104.226] by mailspool.cables2u.com; Wed, 8 Jan 2008 08:34:04 +0800 From: "Shirley Mclean" To: Subject: GoodOnlineStoreCory Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2008 08:34:04 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: Aca6QXMGSFV6ACBP6DY69738LUYL7I== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Message-ID: <01c851d1$39cfe600$e268adde@maoistsr> X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 CoyCheapStore http://anbelieve.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 08 20:59:27 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCQDq-00013W-LQ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:59:14 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCQDp-000136-GM for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:59:13 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCQDp-00012y-5I for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:59:13 -0500 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.177]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCQDo-0004br-MS for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:59:12 -0500 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id x19so69861pyg.24 for ; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:59:12 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=TNuiSmuBMopPVGKvRVltyKN7Ofvm6Ljm2BhNoReBBTQ=; b=gzro1OUdolvPz+nWuQk+JKNYob9fl2yOdAjyL93xaOGjDKWNrGCnbpBp6SGqHzfa+fp/5NBsIIEsYsBrUVhFp0vznlRNQZcfQfvaQ8tASetgzeamMvBt2xgCg4poWetJaTWKHdnWM3fijH6ASJNDPVP0Wu4X40DDlMe5EfN3GSc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=leVwH6w2xyAPYFQzJs9DtPrlrjAUZAh3T6iZ4e2fXZLUJ7RHXDu/DafPQewibfPPiuRBqsmV3rMyEvVQx/SodshkhUBSk1PlhN8uY11r21e7sYfXHINTtSm1D27eegnN3doBjlR6MPlzguh37GW7r8FWVgBoz1NLmMHP6RcdTjM= Received: by 10.65.205.16 with SMTP id h16mr302657qbq.31.1199843952166; Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:59:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.64.143.1 with HTTP; Tue, 8 Jan 2008 17:59:12 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <66cd252f0801081759g144eec4ak285d36f4e2edc4e0@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 12:59:12 +1100 From: "Hisham Khartabil" To: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB045@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <66cd252f0801071415p2b1d61cfr221f114f8a4fa929@mail.gmail.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB045@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org As long as we have nickname uniqueness within a chatroom, I agree with any mechanism you suggest to achieve that. Thanks, Hisham On 08/01/2008, Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > Comments inline. > > > > [snip snip] > > > render the domain part of it to make it so. > > > > I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of 2 > > participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the > > application to distinguish them for the user. > > > > The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the chatroom > > service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. > > Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to be > inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason for > this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the clients > acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. > Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside a > domain complicates the implementation of the server. > > > > That would probably violate > > > what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering > mechanisms > > > has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). > > > > Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the application? I > > think not. > > I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested method > to avoid having to render a nickname like this: > nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com > > > [snip snip] > > > > This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of the > > > winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > > > beertasters-chat@example.org. > > > > Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been a > > while though). There were a few people against what you just proposed > > due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both > > chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. > > The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the UI > would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a > domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? > > Geir Arne > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 09 02:56:04 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCVmk-0007kw-6n; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:55:38 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCVmi-0007kq-Fm for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:55:36 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCVmc-0007ka-4P for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:55:30 -0500 Received: from smtp.nokia.com ([192.100.105.134] helo=mgw-mx09.nokia.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCVmb-00038K-No for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 02:55:30 -0500 Received: from esebh107.NOE.Nokia.com (esebh107.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.143.143]) by mgw-mx09.nokia.com (Switch-3.2.6/Switch-3.2.6) with ESMTP id m097tvjY026553; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 01:56:13 -0600 Received: from esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com ([172.21.138.183]) by esebh107.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:55:16 +0200 Received: from esdhcp04034.research.nokia.com ([172.21.40.34]) by esebh102.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:55:15 +0200 From: =?iso-8859-1?q?R=E9mi_Denis-Courmont?= Organization: Nokia TP-SP-SWD To: "ext Cullen Jennings" Subject: Re: [Simple] MSRP congestion control issue when using relays Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:56:02 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405) References: <8983EC086A9D954BA74D9763E853CF3E045A3F6A@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> <200801081216.12684.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200801090956.02447.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2008 07:55:15.0801 (UTC) FILETIME=[F882AC90:01C85294] X-Nokia-AV: Clean X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 21c69d3cfc2dd19218717dbe1d974352 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Le Wednesday 09 January 2008 00:51:21 ext Cullen Jennings, vous avez =E9cri= t=A0: > On Jan 8, 2008, at 2:16 AM, R=E9mi Denis-Courmont wrote: > > My understanding is that model one works if file transfers are > > banned, and the > > second model does not work at all because MSRP is missing critical > > pieces for > > such a model to work (i.e. any way to signal congestion on per MSRP > > session > > rather than per TCP session). > > I don't think the critical pieces for this are missing. It signals it > on the TCP session level (using normal TCP push back) and then the > sender interrupts the current chunk and switches to other chunk. So > the multiplexing is at the MRSP sessions level but normal TCP > mechanisms are used to signal the feedback. When a TCP session backs off between two relays, it would normally mean the= =20 link between them is saturated. Of course, it may also be that the downstream relay dequeues too slowly at= =20 application layer, which is what you seem to refer to. Unfortunately,=20 upstream cannot tell the difference, because the typical TCP API does not l= et=20 the application know why the TCP circuit is congested. But lets assume for a minute that the upstream relay would still know that= =20 the "push back" means that it should stop sending chunks from the session t= he=20 currently transmitted chunk belongs to. So what? Does it abort that session= ?=20 Otherwise, when does it resume transmission to it? No matter how you put things. If you try to transmit multiple streams on to= p=20 of the same TCP circuit without per-stream congestion, you will have HOL=20 blocking, *or* you will need infinite buffers *and* infinite timeouts. =2D-=20 R=E9mi Denis-Courmont _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 09 04:53:46 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCXcz-0008Lk-1J; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:53:41 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCXcx-0008Le-Ct for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:53:39 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCXcx-0008LW-08 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:53:39 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCXcw-0003V4-9v for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:53:38 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m099rL1b020931; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:53:30 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:53:27 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:53:28 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB2B2@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <47840E8B.6080001@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms Thread-Index: AchSUqavA6B1N2EARUG23CUfXH/r2wATF2gg From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Paul Kyzivat" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2008 09:53:27.0486 (UTC) FILETIME=[7B7BEDE0:01C852A5] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 386e0819b1192672467565a524848168 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >=20 > I'm a poor judge of what we need to support here. It sounds like there > are nickname changes that don't expect anonymity, and some that do. I agree, but there is a catch. If you want to suddenly appear as another person by changing the nickname, the change event itself also provides means of correlation. IMHO, the participants of a chat room would easily detect such a change based on things like timing. A "stealthy" nickname change would probably require that the participant leaves the conference, wait a random amount of time and rejoin having another routable address and another nickname. =20 Thanks, Geir Arne > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > Comments at end. > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > >> Sent: 08 January 2008 17:56 > >> To: Geir Arne Sandbakken > >> Cc: Hisham Khartabil; simple@ietf.org > >> Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms > >> > >> Comment at end. > >> > >> Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > >>>>>> [snip snip] > >>>>>> I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI and > >>>>>> prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom focus) > >>> using > >>>>>> my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside > > the > >>>>>> chatroom focus. > >>>>> The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. > >>>> No it doesn't need to be unique. Anonymous means you cannot reach > > me > >>>> if you use this SIP URI. > >>> The conference package states that the focus has to construct the > > user > >>> part of anonymous entity URI to be unique among all participants of > > the > >>> same domain. If it can't be used as a routable address inside the > > scope > >>> of the conference, we need to construct one for reasons described > > below. > >>> A requirement for a nickname is that it can be changed by a > > participant > >>> at any time during a conference. Having a routable address just > > change > >>> will lead to race conditions and other problems. This is especially > >>> important for protocols like MSRP where you can chunk large messages > >>> like files. You could try to mend the problem by adding some hefty > >>> semantics to the focus and/or MSRP switch, but that just makes my > > head > >>> spin. > >>> > >>> We need a single routable address associated to a participant as > > long as > >>> the participant is part of the conference. > >> Its my impression that one reason for changing nicknames is to appear > > to > >> others as a different person, not correlated to the prior one. Of the > >> routable address remains the same then it provides a means of > > correlation. > > > > I remember to have seen notifications in IRC when someone in the room > > changes their nickname. XMPP supports such notifications, but I don't > > know if they are typical. Having a teenager in the house I have seen > > quite some long and wired nicknames used in various IM systems, but > > their identity/address seems to be quite persistent. It also seems like > > the nicknames changes as the mood changes - which are quite often. > > > > Do we need to support stealth changes of nicknames? > > > > Thanks, > > Geir Arne > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From derickmb9@marklehman.com Wed Jan 09 05:18:52 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCY1M-0000vS-Sf for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 05:18:52 -0500 Received: from [212.57.134.98] (helo=[212.57.134.98]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCY1L-0005bF-Ia for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 05:18:52 -0500 Received: from [212.57.134.98] by mx1.InternetCrusade.com; Wed, 8 Jan 2008 15:18:50 +0500 From: "Errol Easley" To: Subject: BradlyExcellentStore Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2008 15:18:50 +0500 Message-ID: <01c85209$c5656900$628639d4@derickmb9> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 GoodLillyStore http://mayfact.com From ducey@greenfrontier.com Wed Jan 09 09:01:21 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCbUf-00029Y-19; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:01:21 -0500 Received: from [124.254.178.181] (helo=somsponge) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCbUb-0003Ju-Qw; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:01:18 -0500 Received: from [124.254.178.181] by mailstore1.secureserver.net; Wed, 8 Jan 2008 23:00:07 +0900 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2008 23:00:07 +0900 From: "Burnett" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.01) Educational Reply-To: ducey@greenfrontier.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <193873909.91001412285821@greenfrontier.com> To: sigtran-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Feather Thermometer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Hey You I tried to attach a picture to this email Im not sure if I did it correctly If you dont see it please Email me at Cherry@ImproveThies.info and I will retry right away Maybe we can Chat soon From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 09 09:16:30 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCbix-0002Da-KT; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:16:07 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCbiw-0002DV-Ek for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:16:06 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCbiw-0002DM-2V for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:16:06 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCbiv-0003hG-JE for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:16:05 -0500 Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2008 09:16:06 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m09EG5JH027697; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:16:05 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m09EFd7L000208; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 14:16:05 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:15:51 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.128] ([161.44.174.128]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:15:50 -0500 Message-ID: <4784D718.3020306@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:15:52 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geir Arne Sandbakken Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB2B2@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB2B2@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2008 14:15:50.0786 (UTC) FILETIME=[2338DE20:01C852CA] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3457; t=1199888165; x=1200752165; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Single=20routable=20address= 20in=20MSRP=20chat=20rooms |Sender:=20 |To:=20Geir=20Arne=20Sandbakken=20; bh=O6LQCJxtcEGWgQzLLUazRC4BMdtnB4Yd+TrjbjKkHUM=; b=FTqgwHLwM3rxMjxyl52aW506AcT2CBgjqQgwKBzbN4WZ7apKWDQU5i44Av svBVJlrBU2ZfuRQHAoEoSP4G5kUDl2iANzLKQKdIMhyu10Jt+vYA+iWZ1VKj rRCb3544Mb; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf3becbbd6d1a45acbe2ffd4ab88bdc2 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org good point. Paul Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> >> I'm a poor judge of what we need to support here. It sounds like there >> are nickname changes that don't expect anonymity, and some that do. > > I agree, but there is a catch. If you want to suddenly appear as > another person by changing the nickname, the change event itself also > provides means of correlation. IMHO, the participants of a chat room > would easily detect such a change based on things like timing. > > A "stealthy" nickname change would probably require that the participant > leaves the conference, wait a random amount of time and rejoin having > another routable address and another nickname. > > Thanks, > Geir Arne > >> Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >>> Comments at end. >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >>>> Sent: 08 January 2008 17:56 >>>> To: Geir Arne Sandbakken >>>> Cc: Hisham Khartabil; simple@ietf.org >>>> Subject: Re: [Simple] Single routable address in MSRP chat rooms >>>> >>>> Comment at end. >>>> >>>> Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >>>>>>>> [snip snip] >>>>>>>> I think we need both. I want to be anonymous with my SIP URI > and >>>>>>>> prefer you to send me a private message (via the chatroom > focus) >>>>> using >>>>>>>> my nickname. Those nicknames don't need to be routable outside >>> the >>>>>>>> chatroom focus. >>>>>>> The anonymous SIP URI of a conference is required to be unique. >>>>>> No it doesn't need to be unique. Anonymous means you cannot reach >>> me >>>>>> if you use this SIP URI. >>>>> The conference package states that the focus has to construct the >>> user >>>>> part of anonymous entity URI to be unique among all participants > of >>> the >>>>> same domain. If it can't be used as a routable address inside the >>> scope >>>>> of the conference, we need to construct one for reasons described >>> below. >>>>> A requirement for a nickname is that it can be changed by a >>> participant >>>>> at any time during a conference. Having a routable address just >>> change >>>>> will lead to race conditions and other problems. This is > especially >>>>> important for protocols like MSRP where you can chunk large > messages >>>>> like files. You could try to mend the problem by adding some hefty >>>>> semantics to the focus and/or MSRP switch, but that just makes my >>> head >>>>> spin. >>>>> >>>>> We need a single routable address associated to a participant as >>> long as >>>>> the participant is part of the conference. >>>> Its my impression that one reason for changing nicknames is to > appear >>> to >>>> others as a different person, not correlated to the prior one. Of > the >>>> routable address remains the same then it provides a means of >>> correlation. >>> >>> I remember to have seen notifications in IRC when someone in the > room >>> changes their nickname. XMPP supports such notifications, but I > don't >>> know if they are typical. Having a teenager in the house I have > seen >>> quite some long and wired nicknames used in various IM systems, but >>> their identity/address seems to be quite persistent. It also seems > like >>> the nicknames changes as the mood changes - which are quite often. >>> >>> Do we need to support stealth changes of nicknames? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Geir Arne >>> > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From ter171@icqmail.com Wed Jan 09 10:09:56 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCcZ2-0006kH-N4; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:09:56 -0500 Received: from [88.232.129.175] (helo=[88.232.129.175]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCcZ1-0007V9-Gz; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:09:56 -0500 Received: from [88.232.129.175] by mx2.icq.mail2world.com; Wed, 8 Jan 2008 17:09:45 +0200 From: "Nadia Stahl" To: Subject: Re: Crystal Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2008 17:09:45 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85219$4415d280$af81e858@ter171> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea We sell only US FDA approved prescription drugs through our fully licensed pharmacy. orders are overviewed by licensed accredited doctors. http://www.qualityoptimum.com this should be your In a way that makes you adjust to school settings, the will be provides a or on the real relationship have shown that From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 09 10:23:13 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCcln-0006ee-LT; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:23:07 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JCcll-0006dM-TO for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:23:05 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCcll-0006cq-Gb for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:23:05 -0500 Received: from sj-iport-6.cisco.com ([171.71.176.117]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCcll-0007t7-1A for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:23:05 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,263,1196668800"; d="scan'208";a="32974745" Received: from sj-dkim-4.cisco.com ([171.71.179.196]) by sj-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2008 07:23:03 -0800 Received: from sj-core-3.cisco.com (sj-core-3.cisco.com [171.68.223.137]) by sj-dkim-4.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m09FN3AD001125; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 07:23:03 -0800 Received: from [192.168.4.177] (sjc-fluffy-vpn1.cisco.com [10.25.236.82]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with SMTP id m09FN2fs016421; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:23:02 GMT In-Reply-To: <200801090956.02447.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> References: <8983EC086A9D954BA74D9763E853CF3E045A3F6A@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> <200801081216.12684.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> <200801090956.02447.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com> Impp: xmpp:cullenfluffyjennings@jabber.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-Id: <5B34BA20-7664-46DA-A7C7-AB29D2052082@cisco.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Cullen Jennings Subject: Re: [Simple] MSRP congestion control issue when using relays Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 07:22:07 -0800 To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9mi_Denis-Courmont?= X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2675; t=1199892183; x=1200756183; c=relaxed/simple; s=sjdkim4002; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=fluffy@cisco.com; z=From:=20Cullen=20Jennings=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20MSRP=20congestion=20control= 20issue=20when=20using=20relays |Sender:=20; bh=TSwAl5aRo/jK82xXd7bYmoxHwrpNkDWhqBTf/IBA/XQ=; b=EzTLVN5pwaXgIyr4HFqWKiOeU1x/LR/sF/QstnWVhIy3lIMN3Ieccu3AfQ VsU+OK246vb3mERJj+W/5omY3dRFNUfYTKpWXlbvvoyNeSpBc2bth2trWMZ2 WZ0ftGKZ0+; Authentication-Results: sj-dkim-4; header.From=fluffy@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/sjdkim4002 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52f7a77164458f8c7b36b66787c853da Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org On Jan 8, 2008, at 11:56 PM, R=E9mi Denis-Courmont wrote: > Le Wednesday 09 January 2008 00:51:21 ext Cullen Jennings, vous =20 > avez =E9crit : > > On Jan 8, 2008, at 2:16 AM, R=E9mi Denis-Courmont wrote: > > > My understanding is that model one works if file transfers are > > > banned, and the > > > second model does not work at all because MSRP is missing critical > > > pieces for > > > such a model to work (i.e. any way to signal congestion on per =20 > MSRP > > > session > > > rather than per TCP session). > > > > I don't think the critical pieces for this are missing. It =20 > signals it > > on the TCP session level (using normal TCP push back) and then the > > sender interrupts the current chunk and switches to other chunk. So > > the multiplexing is at the MRSP sessions level but normal TCP > > mechanisms are used to signal the feedback. > > When a TCP session backs off between two relays, it would normally =20 > mean the > link between them is saturated. > > Of course, it may also be that the downstream relay dequeues too =20 > slowly at > application layer, which is what you seem to refer to. Unfortunately, > upstream cannot tell the difference, because the typical TCP API =20 > does not let > the application know why the TCP circuit is congested. > > But lets assume for a minute that the upstream relay would still =20 > know that > the "push back" means that it should stop sending chunks from the =20 > session the > currently transmitted chunk belongs to. So what? Does it abort that =20= > session? > Otherwise, when does it resume transmission to it? > > > No matter how you put things. If you try to transmit multiple =20 > streams on top > of the same TCP circuit without per-stream congestion, you will =20 > have HOL > blocking, *or* you will need infinite buffers *and* infinite timeouts. > > -- > R=E9mi Denis-Courmont > When the relay node wants to push back it starts reading slowly from =20 the TCP session. The sending node has another messages that it wants =20 to send on this TCP pipe so after a bit of time it interrupts and =20 swaps, then the relay can start reading fast for the new message. =20 There is no head of line blocking but there is a delay time where =20 where one message can delay another - however this time is not =20 related to how long the first message is. The length of this time is =20 related to the slow read rate, and the size of pipe including the TCP =20= buffers on either side. This is very analogous to MTU on a normal =20 link. A fair amount of thought went into this and is why the chunk =20 size designed to be so small. _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From wrynessup50@zoorna.com Wed Jan 09 11:00:18 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCdLl-0001yU-WA for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:00:18 -0500 Received: from [201.228.149.156] (helo=COORDINADORA) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCdLi-0000uX-Ir; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:00:15 -0500 Received: from [201.228.149.156] by smtp.secureserver.net; Wed, 8 Jan 2008 11:00:14 -0500 From: "Deanne Abrams" To: Subject: ShlongImmenseKrystal Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2008 11:00:14 -0500 Message-ID: <01c851e5$a523b300$9c95e4c9@wrynessup50> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.6 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 HilaryErectileorganLarge-scale http://www.autobalits.com From gurjitDeVos@concremassa.com.br Wed Jan 09 11:30:58 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCdpS-0000q3-7o for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:30:58 -0500 Received: from [92.228.215.153] (helo=[78.52.92.46]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCdpR-0001xT-IG for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:30:58 -0500 Received: by 10.101.1.215 with SMTP id RplVeDmSaMUmE; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:30:01 +0100 (GMT) Received: by 192.168.28.152 with SMTP id XRlyJCggCMcmKd.4861545059971; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:29:59 +0100 (GMT) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:29:56 +0100 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org From: "gurjit DeVos" Subject: mdaeciwt Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 3.3 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 You don't need a Ferrari to pick up women, you just need a large dick, and here is the solution! http://www.aintmarkstheme.com/ massimil marsseih masenka maskneln mattiin masani masennut mbunai masticav mbuecher meditull marcusho From WilburnimaginateBattle@impactminiatures.net Wed Jan 09 13:44:49 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCfuz-0007dH-Mr; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:44:49 -0500 Received: from 84.123.117.178.dyn.user.ono.com ([84.123.117.178] helo=your4dacd0ea75) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCfuy-00067z-8F; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:44:49 -0500 Received: from henbane by impactminiatures.net with SMTP id mgq7pyBzqV for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:43:46 -0100 From: "Myles Yang" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCjkK-0002vM-NL; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:50:04 -0500 Received: from [190.182.7.80] (helo=equipo5) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCjkK-0003Ti-AH; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:50:04 -0500 Received: from firebreak by lexisnexis.com with SMTP id EZCeOEAAzk for ; Wed, 9 Jan 2008 14:49:51 +0800 From: "Leona Frey" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCn22-00023M-Ns for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:20:34 -0500 Received: from 165-154-37-36.ispnetbilling.com ([165.154.37.36] helo=bas1) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCn21-0007Hc-KG for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:20:34 -0500 Received: from [165.154.37.36] by mx.ableonline.org; Wed, 8 Jan 2008 21:28:49 -0500 Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2008 21:28:49 -0500 From: "Forrest Tabor" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.71.04) Educational Reply-To: akstcableonlinemnsdgs@ableonline.org X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <736923168.90440165863570@ableonline.org> To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: maya MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.4 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea All types of pill`s which are best quality. check it out--> http://www railweather com Replace spaces with DOTS to use the URL. Your order is secure and safe. From BrunounanimityLandry@mediageek.net Thu Jan 10 05:25:23 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCubD-0002YJ-On; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:25:23 -0500 Received: from auh-as47711.alshamil.net.ae ([86.97.171.213] helo=poweredbyalatta.domain.invalid) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JCubD-0006IS-0z; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 05:25:23 -0500 Received: from theist by mediageek.net with SMTP id w9qDyMY2VE for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:24:57 -0400 From: "Coy Leblanc" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JD45a-0004uv-16 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:33:22 -0500 Received: from catv-5985503b.catv.broadband.hu ([89.133.80.59]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JD45Z-0004E2-8T for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:33:21 -0500 Received: from othon-0c51e61d3 ([130.107.184.94]:16482 "EHLO othon-0c51e61d3" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by catv-5985503b.catv.broadband.hu with ESMTP id S22PBWBGAKSWBUEI (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:33:54 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 21:33:20 +0100 From: "Nagel Hueppelsheuser" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: aminator Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Let 2008 be the year your new dick is revealed http://penisgt.com/
From johny@rpnco.com Thu Jan 10 17:25:31 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JD5q7-0004g8-FX; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:25:31 -0500 Received: from bhe201062193120.res-com.wayinternet.com.br ([201.62.193.120]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JD5q6-0006XG-A7; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 17:25:31 -0500 Received: from [201.62.193.120] by mail.rpnco.com; Thu, 9 Jan 2008 19:24:18 -0300 Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2008 19:24:18 -0300 From: "Edgar Odell" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.0) Educational Reply-To: johny@rpnco.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <606997445.01116771486133@rpnco.com> To: sigtran-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Triangle MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 Look at our FDA prescription medications through our licensed pharmacy. All orders are overviewed by our licensed accredited medical team. http://CornellKnoxVD.googlepages.com From KentcigaretteCastro@ccel.org Thu Jan 10 18:46:06 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JD766-0004nT-NK; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:46:06 -0500 Received: from [79.147.55.186] (helo=windowsfi30ocq) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JD765-00086H-Pz; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:46:06 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host66439586.ccel.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id jbvNdZmB42.132796.7ef.lvE.5061346270350 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 01:45:45 -0200 Message-ID: <80e6d01c853e2$f3a01c90$02f9a8c0@windowsfi30ocq> From: "Sergio Beck" To: Subject: Confirmation link Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 01:45:45 -0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_80E69_01C853E2.F3A01C90" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_80E69_01C853E2.F3A01C90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When you are young and stressed up… When you are aged and never give up… Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better sex more often. Learn More Now ------=_NextPart_000_80E69_01C853E2.F3A01C90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_80E69_01C853E2.F3A01C90-- From MargaritoglasswareAlston@fair.org Thu Jan 10 23:46:23 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDBmg-0005Bg-VV; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:46:22 -0500 Received: from ppp-58.9.28.173.revip2.asianet.co.th ([58.9.28.173] helo=greennet002) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDBmg-0004uD-DN; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:46:22 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host37247318.fair.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id ED5s6TkA53.679603.r7G.KJE.1178865611587 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 23:44:28 +1200 Message-ID: <1a46101c85447$60b3dab0$3601a8c0@greennet002> From: "Kieth Cote" To: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_1A45D_01C85447.60B3DAB0-- From versingx7@fotojose.com Fri Jan 11 02:53:55 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDEiB-0001uP-6v for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:53:55 -0500 Received: from [89.204.24.145] (helo=[89.204.24.145]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDEiA-0000HA-0Z for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:53:55 -0500 Received: from [89.204.24.145] by correo.fotojose.com; Fri, 10 Jan 2008 12:53:54 +0500 From: "Kenton Logan" To: Subject: Help StopPrematureEjaaculation Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2008 12:53:54 +0500 Message-ID: <01c85387$db009d00$9118cc59@versingx7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.8 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 Doctor Approved And Recommended http://www.gourske.com From KaseymashChristiansen@starway.org Fri Jan 11 07:46:46 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDJHa-0004HP-Sw; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:46:46 -0500 Received: from i03m-62-35-205-42.d4.club-internet.fr ([62.35.205.42] helo=valcde44f83bf5) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDJHa-00065k-Ht; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 07:46:46 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host93748994.starway.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id 6HpwHL8295.103657.aMe.Vel.5469516798114 for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:46:38 -0100 Message-ID: <5eef101c85450$0b182df0$0301a8c0@valcde44f83bf5> From: "Maryanne Doty" To: Subject: Your life Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 13:46:38 -0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_5EEED_01C85450.0B182DF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_5EEED_01C85450.0B182DF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When you are young and stressed up… When you are aged and never give up… Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better sex more often. Learn More Now ------=_NextPart_000_5EEED_01C85450.0B182DF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_5EEED_01C85450.0B182DF0-- From banknotewi019@dwtools.com Fri Jan 11 08:14:16 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDJiC-0008Uz-2N for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:14:16 -0500 Received: from catv-50638145.catv.broadband.hu ([80.99.129.69] helo=zsemberi-5e738c.chello.hu) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDJi9-0006bb-VM; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:14:15 -0500 Received: from [80.99.129.69] by mx00.1and1.com; Fri, 10 Jan 2008 14:14:13 +0100 From: "Alma Weaver" To: Subject: Larger and Larger Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2008 14:14:13 +0100 Message-ID: <01c85393$1359a880$45816350@banknotewi019> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 Doctor Approved And Recommended http://www.lituesr.com From yotuki@daveni.com Fri Jan 11 08:52:58 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDKJe-0003tR-Cv; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:52:58 -0500 Received: from [64.56.250.96] (helo=[64.56.250.96]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDKJc-0007bt-Q2; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 08:52:57 -0500 Received: from [64.56.250.96] by rhea.easily.co.uk; Fri, 10 Jan 2008 08:51:44 -0500 Message-ID: <01c85366$06a70d80$60fa3840@yotuki> From: "Mindy Gustafson" To: Subject: Web Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2008 08:51:44 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3338.1 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3338.1 X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db We sell only US FDA approved prescription medication through our licensed pharmacy. orders are overviewed by licensed accredited medical staff. http://EdgardoOchoaHP.googlepages.com From AbbegaileDostal@fortuneglobal.co.uk Fri Jan 11 10:37:22 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDLwg-0006B8-DP for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:37:22 -0500 Received: from chello089078158239.chello.pl ([89.78.158.239]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDLwf-0001Ze-RN for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:37:22 -0500 Received: from pawe- ([170.112.88.16] helo=pawe-) by chello089078158239.chello.pl ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1ZWvvj-000RQZ-OS for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:37:19 +0100 Message-ID: <55B1E286.5AC815B5@fortuneglobal.co.uk> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:36:59 +0100 From: "Abbegaile Dostal" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: 2237-347 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 Order today, get your pills next week, your new dick will be ready in 1 month http://rousetsj.com/ From EduardodigestibleMiles@chicago-l.org Fri Jan 11 11:28:42 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDMkL-0004y8-VH; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:28:42 -0500 Received: from [189.147.47.195] (helo=desktop) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDMkL-0002aS-K5; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:28:41 -0500 Received: from deluge by chicago-l.org with SMTP id xqk7ugnRSI for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 17:28:26 -0100 From: "Virgil Chambers" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDQfl-00089l-6d; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:40:13 -0500 Received: from 0x5551feb5.adsl.cybercity.dk ([85.81.254.181] helo=mz44bq9f2t99ep) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDQfk-0002cG-Oi; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:40:13 -0500 Received: from emile by unesco.org with SMTP id V6bsA8CGmx for ; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:39:55 -0100 From: "Cyrus Rollins" To: Subject: Best offer in gambling history . Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Come find out. How about the best service around? Our safe, secure games will get you smiling when you start seeing dollars pouring in. Play your favorite games and get $2400 welcome bonus. http://morebestcasino.com/ From frolen@tradgrav.com Fri Jan 11 19:34:52 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDUKq-0001Kt-MG; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:34:52 -0500 Received: from host-12-173-142-207.nctv.com ([12.173.142.207]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDUKp-0007Gh-Fp; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 19:34:52 -0500 Received: from [12.173.142.207] by mace.privatedns.com; Fri, 10 Jan 2008 19:33:39 -0500 From: "Brant Gibbons" To: Subject: Drill Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2008 19:33:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.6353 Thread-Index: Aca6QL7CFCIV89ZRHWRSAYJB9JFD01== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 Message-ID: <01c853bf$b3704f00$cf8ead0c@frolen> X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 All Med s are onsale today Dont miss out on this savings http://SheldonValenciaLN.googlepages.com From gwalker@townhallsoftware.com Sat Jan 12 07:32:46 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDfXa-0001Fh-Nc; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 07:32:46 -0500 Received: from [213.168.163.132] (helo=line.best-net.cz) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDfXZ-0001XX-GO; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 07:32:46 -0500 Received: from [213.168.163.132] by smtp.greatmail.com; Sat, 11 Jan 2008 13:31:04 +0100 From: "Tonia Rivera" To: Subject: Album Coffee-shop Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2008 13:31:04 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: Aca6QHH7MMVI6CHJ8KT7S6XYGG1KMF== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1506 Message-ID: <01c85456$36d18300$84a3a8d5@gwalker> X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 No more worries, men! Medical professionals have endorsed the HerbalMaxx system to help men just like you achieve increased SIZE, LENGTH and WIDTH of their Manhood http://crankyomrrbd.googlepages.com From WeldonalgaeBlevins@nypost.com Sat Jan 12 07:43:51 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDfiJ-0002C0-Bt; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 07:43:51 -0500 Received: from 81.202.142.123.dyn.user.ono.com ([81.202.142.123] helo=argentia) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDfiJ-0001kV-1A; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 07:43:51 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host61437727.nypost.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id rWFGnHnb97.611794.YRE.PKi.5947799623225 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:43:33 -0100 Message-ID: <52b1b01c85518$c7528830$0200a8c0@ARGENTIA> From: "Beau Pugh" To: Subject: Your order approved Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 13:43:33 -0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_52B17_01C85518.C7528830" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_52B17_01C85518.C7528830 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When you are young and stressed up… When you are aged and never give up… Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better sex more often. Learn More Now ------=_NextPart_000_52B17_01C85518.C7528830 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_52B17_01C85518.C7528830-- From Feras@mnaim.com Sat Jan 12 09:08:04 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDh1o-0003C9-Pw for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:08:04 -0500 Received: from host87-176-static.5-79-b.business.telecomitalia.it ([79.5.176.87]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDh1n-0003Ip-SL for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:08:04 -0500 Received: from yucca-bupvcbz7u ([151.196.151.160]:2073 "EHLO yucca-bupvcbz7u" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by host87-176-static.5-79-b.business.telecomitalia.it with ESMTP id S22KCRJTZGGEHIUA (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:08:24 +0100 Message-ID: <000c01c85524$8be01040$57b0054f@yuccabupvcbz7u> From: "Feras Klapal" To: Subject: reinsani Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:08:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8552C.EDA47840" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 2409bba43e9c8d580670fda8b695204a ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8552C.EDA47840 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Imagine if your penis was 2 inches longer and 1 inch thicker? = http://www.INKSDNS.com/ ------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8552C.EDA47840 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Imagine if your penis was 2 inches longer and 1 = inch=20 thicker? http://www.INKSDNS.com/=
------=_NextPart_000_0008_01C8552C.EDA47840-- From aclewis@woodvibrations.com Sat Jan 12 09:26:41 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDhJo-0007QD-V9; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:26:40 -0500 Received: from [193.34.78.49] (helo=adsl-cs-78-49.ttk.if.ua) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDhJn-0003jB-FX; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 09:26:40 -0500 Received: from [193.34.78.49] by fltr-in1.mail.dreamhost.com; Sat, 11 Jan 2008 16:25:25 +0200 Message-ID: <01c8546e$91d74880$314e22c1@aclewis> From: "Jewel Bolden" To: Subject: Tiger Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2008 16:25:25 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Spam-Score: 3.2 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 All Med s are onsale today Dont miss out on this savings http://RoderickJenkinsMK.googlepages.com From BeulaharmyMurdock@superiorpics.com Sat Jan 12 12:58:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDkcW-0008RA-84; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:58:12 -0500 Received: from pool-71-100-7-234.tampfl.dsl-w.verizon.net ([71.100.7.234] helo=mateogallego.domainnotset.invalid) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDkcV-0007Ua-Tu; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:58:12 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host40996901.superiorpics.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id 76XnY3TB88.717423.TJO.D20.6729111179156 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:57:54 +0500 Message-ID: <3144301c85544$af6889a0$4101a8c0@mateogallego> From: "Verna Quintana" To: Cc: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_3143F_01C85544.AF6889A0-- From AdelineapartheidBautista@nanotechwire.com Sat Jan 12 15:18:44 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDmoW-0005Qt-Nx; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:18:44 -0500 Received: from 62-30-121-30.cable.ubr03.chwo.blueyonder.co.uk ([62.30.121.30] helo=jamie1f245a072) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDmoW-0001pc-DL; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:18:44 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host72013929.nanotechwire.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id FV4bmuby32.134817.8m5.yB5.9182832771259 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 20:18:20 +0000 Message-ID: <4d17901c85558$507d4890$0132a8c0@jamie1f245a072> From: "Lizzie Moseley" To: Subject: Your health Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 20:18:20 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_4D175_01C85558.507D4890" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_4D175_01C85558.507D4890 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable When you are young and stressed up… When you are aged and never give up… Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better sex more often. Learn More Now ------=_NextPart_000_4D175_01C85558.507D4890 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_4D175_01C85558.507D4890-- From NicholassensitiveSanders@physorg.com Sat Jan 12 19:04:13 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDqKj-0002IE-Kl; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:04:13 -0500 Received: from [190.188.196.131] (helo=edu) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDqKj-0006Jh-8f; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:04:13 -0500 Received: from average by physorg.com with SMTP id yHXwNoxNNp for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:03:54 +0300 From: "Roy Torres" To: Subject: Single-hand blackjack.. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Your own privater Vegas! We know how to treat our players - how about a $2400 welcome bonmus when you join? Win $$$ instead of throwing it all away at other casinos. Get $2400 you download our casino. http://placebetscasino.com/ From simple-bounces@ietf.org Sat Jan 12 22:52:52 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDttu-0008KQ-P2; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:46 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JDtts-0008JT-T3 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:44 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDtts-0008It-Gx for simple@ietf.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:44 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDttr-0002kC-Sb for simple@ietf.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:44 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,277,1196658000"; d="scan'208";a="83182370" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2008 22:52:44 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0D3qh4N009252 for ; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:43 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0D3qfN6029992 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:52:43 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:41 -0500 Received: from [10.86.240.235] ([10.86.240.235]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:40 -0500 Message-ID: <47898B0A.8040800@cisco.com> Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 22:52:42 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simple WG References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2008 03:52:40.0996 (UTC) FILETIME=[BED2AE40:01C85597] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3973; t=1200196363; x=1201060363; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20I-D=20Action=3Adraft-hellstrom-simple-t ext-transmission-00.txt |Sender:=20 |To:=20Simple=20WG=20; bh=G6Yid2c9IHNu69N4RM+DA5lx4dy3EAMEBieUNwUgssk=; b=AMtlk3EnsjqhKmTedx79X54X4Ea7EiYKfAqYoUefHKCBrDHz9CePpNtQnt HSdgaIPes0Cr60CDxTvABJIjv9Y0b0RYk6OBSzzP7g+YzXBpbSoXr07OoZ4t bOSaSgMFo2; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: c3a18ef96977fc9bcc21a621cbf1174b Subject: [Simple] Re: I-D Action:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I find this to be pretty interesting. My feeling has been that the best chance for pervasive support of real time text is for it to be incorporated into a widely used application and protocol. IM qualifies as a widely used application, though MSRP doesn't yet qualify as a widely used protocol. This could however be synergistic - it might result in some pressure to support MSRP. BUT the problem mentioned as Issue 4 is potentially fatal. If relays are involved in the session, it is likely that they would think it appropriate to buffer and re-chunk the chunks, destroying the real time characteristics. I don't see how to avoid this unless some way to negotiate the behavior of relays can be devised. Also, if relays multiplex multiple MSRP sessions on a single, that can also impact the real time characteristics. Thanks, Paul Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > Title : Coding and transmission of text in real-time and en-bloc mode based on MSRP > Author(s) : G. Hellstrom, et al. > Filename : draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt > Pages : 15 > Date : 2008-01-09 > > This memo describes conventions for exchange and presentation of text > in SIP sessions through the Message Session Relay Protocol MSRP. It > covers two different methods for taking the initiative to transmit. > These methods are timer initiated real-time text and user requested > en-bloc transmission in Messaging. The document gives specific > guidance on handling of text presentation and presentation control of > conversational sessions. It specifies how the capability to conduct > MSRP sessions with real-time text is declared so that session > negotiation can make decisions on what transport protocol to use and > how to route the calls to get the desired support for text > communication. > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of > the message. > You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > to change your subscription settings. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the > username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After > logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then > "get draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > Send a message to: > mailserv@ietf.org. > In the body type: > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > how to manipulate these messages. > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the > Internet-Draft. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Sun Jan 13 03:17:02 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDy1U-0002nN-FQ; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:16:52 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JDy1S-0002mR-8W for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:16:50 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDy1L-0002iX-Fd for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:16:43 -0500 Received: from s87.loopia.se ([194.9.94.113]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JDy1K-0004fV-7K for simple@ietf.org; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 03:16:43 -0500 Received: (qmail 15410 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2008 08:16:40 -0000 Received: from s34.loopia.se (HELO s24.loopia.se) ([194.9.94.70]) (envelope-sender ) by s87.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 13 Jan 2008 08:16:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 78324 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2008 08:16:40 -0000 Received: from h240n1fls34o265.telia.com (HELO GunnarH) (gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se@[213.64.232.240]) (envelope-sender ) by s24.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 13 Jan 2008 08:16:40 -0000 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= To: "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Simple WG'" Subject: RE: [Simple] Re: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:16:41 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-reply-to: <47898B0A.8040800@cisco.com> X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 Thread-index: AchVl+8amUpQKL+vQOq4aAuV/aK/sAAIFJkg X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2a76bcd37b1c8a21336eb0a1ea6bbf48 Message-Id: Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Paul, The real-time feature transmitting characters in time-sampled chunks as = they are avialable really gives new life to text-IM. Many of the annoying drawbacks of traditional sentence-wise IM are resolved by this feature. = You do not need any presence indicator that the other person is typing, when = you really whant to know is WHAT is typed. Here you get it. And you do not = need to rush composing your message to completion so that the other = participant shall understand a new appearing situation. Your first keystrokes will = be immediately visible and make it apparent that you are about to explain = the situation. There are numerous situations when the real-time text feature = is very useful.=20 But you are right in pointing at issue 4, saying that MSRP relays may = need to know that they should avoid buffering an re-combination of chunks = when the chunks are used for real-time text. Some additional rules may be = needed for relays. E.g. "do not recombine chunks with text/plain contents and = less than 10 characters of payload".=20 Also multi-party sessions, with more than one active user typing may = cause an extensive message flow. I have calculated that one message flow with three transmissions per second, including relay addressing, takes approximately 17 kbit/s and 12 packets / second. With three typers it becomes 51 kbit/s and 36 packets/s for this session between the relay = and the user terminal.=20 So, an issue 5 might be needed: Is it feasible, regarding bandwidth consumption and processing? If not, can something be done to make this important functional enhancement of text-IM feasible?=20 There is now also a draft available talking more about the presentation aspects that gives complementing information: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-textpreview-04.txt Thanks=20 Gunnar ------------------------------------------------------------------- Gunnar Hellstr=F6m Omnitor gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com]=20 Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:53 AM To: Simple WG Subject: [Simple] Re: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt I find this to be pretty interesting. My feeling has been that the best chance for pervasive support of real time text is for it to be = incorporated into a widely used application and protocol. IM qualifies as a widely = used application, though MSRP doesn't yet qualify as a widely used protocol. = This could however be synergistic - it might result in some pressure to = support MSRP. BUT the problem mentioned as Issue 4 is potentially fatal. If relays are involved in the session, it is likely that they would think it = appropriate to buffer and re-chunk the chunks, destroying the real time characteristics. I don't see how to avoid this unless some way to = negotiate the behavior of relays can be devised. Also, if relays multiplex multiple MSRP sessions on a single, that can = also impact the real time characteristics. Thanks, Paul Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. >=20 > Title : Coding and transmission of text in real-time and en-bloc mode based on MSRP > Author(s) : G. Hellstrom, et al. > Filename : draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt > Pages : 15 > Date : 2008-01-09 >=20 > This memo describes conventions for exchange and presentation of text=20 > in SIP sessions through the Message Session Relay Protocol MSRP. It=20 > covers two different methods for taking the initiative to transmit. > These methods are timer initiated real-time text and user requested=20 > en-bloc transmission in Messaging. The document gives specific=20 > guidance on handling of text presentation and presentation control of=20 > conversational sessions. It specifies how the capability to conduct=20 > MSRP sessions with real-time text is declared so that session=20 > negotiation can make decisions on what transport protocol to use and=20 > how to route the calls to get the desired support for text=20 > communication. >=20 > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmiss= ion -00.txt >=20 > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to=20 > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of = > the message. > You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > to change your subscription settings. >=20 > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the=20 > username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After=20 > logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then > "get draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". >=20 > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >=20 > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >=20 > Send a message to: > mailserv@ietf.org. > In the body type: > "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". >=20 > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > how to manipulate these messages. >=20 > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > Internet-Draft. >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- >=20 > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple __________ NOD32 2785 (20080111) Information __________ Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.nod32.com _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From CarlenesalesladyHearn@secondrotation.com Sun Jan 13 09:30:31 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JE3r5-00068Y-1J; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:30:31 -0500 Received: from [168.126.60.42] (helo=cr212) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JE3r4-000832-B0; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 09:30:30 -0500 Received: from mensuration by secondrotation.com with SMTP id Or2edaCoTV for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:30:02 -0900 From: "Earnestine Nava" To: Cc: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JE5ZI-0007jS-E0; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:20:16 -0500 Received: from c-24-0-11-240.hsd1.nj.comcast.net ([24.0.11.240] helo=your4dacd0ea75.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JE5ZI-00024f-66; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:20:16 -0500 Received: from morley by according2prophecy.org with SMTP id 1Zjjs3c9q8 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:19:56 +0500 From: "Andrew Young" To: Subject: We're serious about fun. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Your own privater Vegas! Free money free fun. We know how to treat our players - how about a $2400 welcome bonmus when you join? When YOU WIN, we win! http://placebetscasino.com/ From WoodrowconcisionQuinn@articulate.com Sun Jan 13 14:28:57 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JE8Vt-00069v-AB; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:28:57 -0500 Received: from p508ed6e1.dip.t-dialin.net ([80.142.214.225] helo=dmt5sfzcggw1hr) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JE8Vq-0005HH-MT; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:28:54 -0500 Received: from budgetary by articulate.com with SMTP id K6F2caroR3 for ; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:28:47 -0100 From: "Simon Quinn" To: , Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEAco-0007XD-5a; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:44:14 -0500 Received: from host234-74-dynamic.16-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([87.16.74.234]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEAcm-0007fn-W6; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 16:44:13 -0500 Received: from [87.16.74.234] by deltek.com.s8b1.psmtp.com; , 12 Jan 2008 22:42:58 +0100 Message-ID: <01c8556c$7a7e8500$ea4a1057@ferronir> From: "Jenny Benton" To: Subject: Adult Date: , 12 Jan 2008 22:42:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-2"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 All Med s are onsale today Dont miss out on this savings http://AnaCarverXW.googlepages.com From telsandquis@covente.com Sun Jan 13 18:31:14 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JECIM-0002GV-Ii; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:31:14 -0500 Received: from [190.24.63.142] (helo=helen) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JECIL-0001gg-2t; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:31:14 -0500 Received: from [190.24.63.142] by mx01.1and1.com; , 12 Jan 2008 18:31:12 -0500 Message-ID: <01c85549$4e9dd800$8e3f18be@telsandquis> From: "Sharon Marcus" To: Subject: Sharon Date: , 12 Jan 2008 18:31:12 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4927.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4927.1200 X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 No more worries, men! Medical professionals have endorsed the HerbalMaxx system to help men just like you achieve increased SIZE, LENGTH and WIDTH of their Manhood http://kfsffopifix.googlepages.com From dponder@zzongsik.com Sun Jan 13 21:21:21 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEEwz-0006Zg-8x; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:21:21 -0500 Received: from [222.104.134.168] (helo=winxp.kornet) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEEwy-0004fl-47; Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:21:20 -0500 Received: from [222.104.134.168] by mail.zzongsik.com; Mon, 13 Jan 2008 11:20:05 +0900 Message-ID: <01c855d6$3f18a080$a88668de@dponder> From: "Antony Odom" To: Subject: Tapestry Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2008 11:20:05 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.2730.2 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.2730.2 X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db We sell only Hard to find medication s. Dont miss out on this huge savings http://fastexciting.com From NedexhumationCallahan@nypost.com Mon Jan 14 09:04:09 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEPv7-00043w-My; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:04:09 -0500 Received: from [84.91.52.86] (helo=mangualde) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEPv7-0001go-5D; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:04:09 -0500 Message-ID: <5b2201c856b6$5dd66f30$0202a8c0@mangualde> From: "Gus Preston" To: Cc: , =20
Your your credit = report does not=20 matter to us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 wish IMMEDIATE cash to spend ANY way you like or wish Extra money to = give your=20 business a boost or require A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, = here is=20 our deal we can offer you NOW (hurry, this offer will expire = NOW):
=20 =20
 
$64,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when best deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply complete this elementary form...
=20
 
Don't worry about = approval, your=20 credit score will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://theyworld.com.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_5B1E_01C856B6.5DD66F30-- From pyergeau@zmtec.com Mon Jan 14 09:54:33 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEQhs-0004gM-QZ; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:54:32 -0500 Received: from [195.182.77.199] (helo=[195.182.77.199]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEQhr-0003Fd-Sk; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:54:32 -0500 Received: from [195.182.77.199] by mx5.biz.mail.yahoo.com; Mon, 13 Jan 2008 16:53:15 +0200 From: "Augustine Welch" To: Subject: Planet Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2008 16:53:15 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: Aca6QID73GL1QO7ZXAIDN54P9H8M9Q== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <01c85604$ca108f80$c74db6c3@pyergeau> X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Look at our popular med s. Dont miss out on this huge savings http://fastexciting.com have the resources, the report says.have the resources, Here's some soothing release Monday the report says.about creating "super children" contribute tothe report says. that they're It says enrichment tools super parents, I believe this message the report says. From andryHumphreys@4st.co.uk Mon Jan 14 10:02:17 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEQpN-00022f-GI for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:02:17 -0500 Received: from inet20909ng-3.eranet.pl ([213.158.196.75]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEQpM-0003XX-Ew for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:02:17 -0500 Received: from kkk-de7t3h7x5m0 ([178.115.79.169] helo=kkk-de7t3h7x5m0) by inet20909ng-3.eranet.pl ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1uwWeh-000JYF-AV for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:02:39 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 16:02:08 +0100 From: "andry Humphreys" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: post-pla Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.5 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 Incredibly, in less than a month, my girlfriend already noticed that
my cock was longer. http://www.Beverpleasure.com/
From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 14 13:20:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JETum-0004oc-Od; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:20:04 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JETul-0004oT-FN for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:20:03 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JETul-0004oL-5F; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:20:03 -0500 Received: from ns0.neustar.com ([156.154.16.158]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JETuk-0001dY-PR; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:20:03 -0500 Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com [10.31.47.10]) by ns0.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86DA0328A2; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:20:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JETuk-0007L9-9E; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:20:02 -0500 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:20:02 -0500 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 386e0819b1192672467565a524848168 Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] I-D Action:draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : Instant Message Disposition Notification Author(s) : E. Burger, H. Khartabil Filename : draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt Pages : 37 Date : 2008-01-14 Instant Messaging (IM) refers to the transfer of messages between users in real-time. This document provides a mechanism whereby endpoints can request Instant Message Disposition Notifications (IMDN), including delivery, processing, and read notifications, for page-mode instant messages. The Common Profile for Instant Messaging (CPIM) data format specified in RFC 3862 is extended with new header fields that enable endpoints to request IMDNs. A new message format is also defined to convey IMDNs. This document also describes how SIP entities behave using this extension. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-01-14131206.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-01-14131206.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --NextPart-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 14 13:35:25 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEU9a-0005Oh-0i; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:35:22 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEU9Y-0005MA-MC for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:35:20 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEU9Y-0005M2-CN for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:35:20 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEU9X-00027y-74 for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:35:20 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0EIZFfi021633; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:35:15 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:33:14 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:32:26 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268B76@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Thread-Index: AchVl+8amUpQKL+vQOq4aAuV/aK/sAAIFJkgAEgOlVA= From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Simple WG" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jan 2008 18:33:14.0851 (UTC) FILETIME=[ECAAEB30:01C856DB] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b8f3559805f7873076212d6f63ee803e Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Gunnar, If packet rate, bandwidth or processing limitations are a concern, you = could think about adding a throttle mechanism. Like an MSRP method that = would request the client to adjust it's sample rate, or even turn off/on = a real time text extension. =20 As an MSRP session can be used for many purposes, you might be required = to tag each MSRP message. The relay could then treat the messages = differently on a message by message basis. =20 Cheers, Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- >=20 > Paul, > The real-time feature transmitting characters in time-sampled=20 > chunks as they are avialable really gives new life to=20 > text-IM. Many of the annoying drawbacks of traditional=20 > sentence-wise IM are resolved by this feature. You do not=20 > need any presence indicator that the other person is typing,=20 > when you really whant to know is WHAT is typed. Here you get=20 > it. And you do not need to rush composing your message to=20 > completion so that the other participant shall understand a=20 > new appearing situation. Your first keystrokes will be=20 > immediately visible and make it apparent that you are about=20 > to explain the situation. There are numerous situations when=20 > the real-time text feature is very useful.=20 >=20 > But you are right in pointing at issue 4, saying that MSRP=20 > relays may need to know that they should avoid buffering an=20 > re-combination of chunks when the chunks are used for=20 > real-time text. Some additional rules may be needed for=20 > relays. E.g. "do not recombine chunks with text/plain=20 > contents and less than 10 characters of payload".=20 >=20 > Also multi-party sessions, with more than one active user=20 > typing may cause an extensive message flow. I have calculated=20 > that one message flow with three transmissions per second,=20 > including relay addressing, takes approximately 17 kbit/s and=20 > 12 packets / second. With three typers it becomes 51 kbit/s=20 > and 36 packets/s for this session between the relay and the=20 > user terminal.=20 >=20 > So, an issue 5 might be needed: Is it feasible, regarding=20 > bandwidth consumption and processing? If not, can something=20 > be done to make this important functional enhancement of=20 > text-IM feasible?=20 >=20 > There is now also a draft available talking more about the=20 > presentation aspects that gives complementing information: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-textpreview-04.txt >=20 >=20 >=20 > Thanks > Gunnar > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Gunnar Hellstr=F6m > Omnitor > gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:53 AM > To: Simple WG > Subject: [Simple] Re: > I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >=20 > I find this to be pretty interesting. My feeling has been=20 > that the best chance for pervasive support of real time text=20 > is for it to be incorporated into a widely used application=20 > and protocol. IM qualifies as a widely used application,=20 > though MSRP doesn't yet qualify as a widely used protocol.=20 > This could however be synergistic - it might result in some=20 > pressure to support MSRP. >=20 > BUT the problem mentioned as Issue 4 is potentially fatal. If=20 > relays are involved in the session, it is likely that they=20 > would think it appropriate to buffer and re-chunk the =20 > chunks, destroying the real time characteristics. I don't see=20 > how to avoid this unless some way to negotiate the behavior=20 > of relays can be devised. >=20 > Also, if relays multiplex multiple MSRP sessions on a single,=20 > that can also impact the real time characteristics. >=20 > Thanks, > Paul >=20 > Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > >=20 > > Title : Coding and transmission of text in=20 > real-time and > en-bloc mode based on MSRP > > Author(s) : G. Hellstrom, et al. > > Filename :=20 > draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt > > Pages : 15 > > Date : 2008-01-09 > >=20 > > This memo describes conventions for exchange and=20 > presentation of text=20 > > in SIP sessions through the Message Session Relay Protocol=20 > MSRP. It=20 > > covers two different methods for taking the initiative to transmit. > > These methods are timer initiated real-time text and user requested=20 > > en-bloc transmission in Messaging. The document gives specific=20 > > guidance on handling of text presentation and presentation=20 > control of=20 > > conversational sessions. It specifies how the capability=20 > to conduct=20 > > MSRP sessions with real-time text is declared so that session=20 > > negotiation can make decisions on what transport protocol=20 > to use and=20 > > how to route the calls to get the desired support for text=20 > > communication. > >=20 > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-tex t-transmission > -00.txt > >=20 > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a=20 > message to=20 > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in=20 > the body of=20 > > the message. > > You can also visit=20 > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > to change your subscription settings. > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the=20 > > username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After=20 > > logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > "get draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > >=20 > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >=20 > > Send a message to: > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > In the body type: > > "FILE > /internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > >=20 > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant=20 > mail readers > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > > how to manipulate these messages. > >=20 > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > > Internet-Draft. > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >=20 > __________ NOD32 2785 (20080111) Information __________ >=20 > Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. > http://www.nod32.com >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >=20 _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 14 14:10:21 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEUhJ-0000pb-Tc; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:10:13 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEUhI-0000hp-P0 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:10:12 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEUhI-0000eh-AH for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:10:12 -0500 Received: from s87.loopia.se ([194.9.94.113]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEUhG-0002l9-WC for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:10:12 -0500 Received: (qmail 19255 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2008 19:10:07 -0000 Received: from s34.loopia.se (HELO s57.loopia.se) ([194.9.94.70]) (envelope-sender ) by s87.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 14 Jan 2008 19:10:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 94295 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2008 19:10:07 -0000 Received: from h240n1fls34o265.telia.com (HELO GunnarH) (gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se@[213.64.232.240]) (envelope-sender ) by s57.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 14 Jan 2008 19:10:07 -0000 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= To: "'Geir Arne Sandbakken'" , "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Simple WG'" Subject: RE: [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:10:12 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: AchVl+8amUpQKL+vQOq4aAuV/aK/sAAIFJkgAEgOlVAAAf2X0A== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 In-reply-to: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268B76@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 32029c790f79bd4a84a26bd2915c54b9 Message-Id: Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Geir Arne, You say: "you might be required to tag each MSRP message" In section 5, item b we have this proposal: b. A Content-disposition=3Dimmediate-presentation to be included in the MSRP headers in the chunks and messages. =20 (This new value of Content-disposition then needs to be registered by = IANA. ) Do you regard tat to be a suitable tagging, or do you have any other mechanism in mind that is possible to use on text/plain, Charset=3Dutf-8 Gunnar ------------------------------------------------------------------- Gunnar Hellstr=F6m Omnitor gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se Tel: +46708204288 www.omnitor.se -----Original Message----- From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com]=20 Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 7:32 PM To: Gunnar Hellstr=F6m; Paul Kyzivat; Simple WG Subject: RE: [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Gunnar, If packet rate, bandwidth or processing limitations are a concern, you could think about adding a throttle mechanism. Like an MSRP method that would request the client to adjust it's sample rate, or even turn off/on = a real time text extension. =20 As an MSRP session can be used for many purposes, you might be required = to tag each MSRP message. The relay could then treat the messages = differently on a message by message basis. =20 Cheers, Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- >=20 > Paul, > The real-time feature transmitting characters in time-sampled chunks=20 > as they are avialable really gives new life to text-IM. Many of the=20 > annoying drawbacks of traditional sentence-wise IM are resolved by=20 > this feature. You do not need any presence indicator that the other=20 > person is typing, when you really whant to know is WHAT is typed. Here = > you get it. And you do not need to rush composing your message to=20 > completion so that the other participant shall understand a new=20 > appearing situation. Your first keystrokes will be immediately visible = > and make it apparent that you are about to explain the situation.=20 > There are numerous situations when the real-time text feature is very=20 > useful. >=20 > But you are right in pointing at issue 4, saying that MSRP relays may=20 > need to know that they should avoid buffering an re-combination of=20 > chunks when the chunks are used for real-time text. Some additional=20 > rules may be needed for relays. E.g. "do not recombine chunks with=20 > text/plain contents and less than 10 characters of payload". >=20 > Also multi-party sessions, with more than one active user typing may=20 > cause an extensive message flow. I have calculated that one message=20 > flow with three transmissions per second, including relay addressing,=20 > takes approximately 17 kbit/s and > 12 packets / second. With three typers it becomes 51 kbit/s and 36=20 > packets/s for this session between the relay and the user terminal. >=20 > So, an issue 5 might be needed: Is it feasible, regarding bandwidth=20 > consumption and processing? If not, can something be done to make this = > important functional enhancement of text-IM feasible? >=20 > There is now also a draft available talking more about the=20 > presentation aspects that gives complementing information: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-textpreview-04.txt >=20 >=20 >=20 > Thanks > Gunnar > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Gunnar Hellstr=F6m > Omnitor > gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:53 AM > To: Simple WG > Subject: [Simple] Re: > I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >=20 > I find this to be pretty interesting. My feeling has been that the=20 > best chance for pervasive support of real time text is for it to be=20 > incorporated into a widely used application and protocol. IM qualifies = > as a widely used application, though MSRP doesn't yet qualify as a=20 > widely used protocol. > This could however be synergistic - it might result in some pressure=20 > to support MSRP. >=20 > BUT the problem mentioned as Issue 4 is potentially fatal. If relays=20 > are involved in the session, it is likely that they would think it=20 > appropriate to buffer and re-chunk the chunks, destroying the real=20 > time characteristics. I don't see how to avoid this unless some way to = > negotiate the behavior of relays can be devised. >=20 > Also, if relays multiplex multiple MSRP sessions on a single, that can = > also impact the real time characteristics. >=20 > Thanks, > Paul >=20 > Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > >=20 > > Title : Coding and transmission of text in=20 > real-time and > en-bloc mode based on MSRP > > Author(s) : G. Hellstrom, et al. > > Filename :=20 > draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt > > Pages : 15 > > Date : 2008-01-09 > >=20 > > This memo describes conventions for exchange and > presentation of text > > in SIP sessions through the Message Session Relay Protocol > MSRP. It > > covers two different methods for taking the initiative to transmit. > > These methods are timer initiated real-time text and user requested=20 > > en-bloc transmission in Messaging. The document gives specific=20 > > guidance on handling of text presentation and presentation > control of > > conversational sessions. It specifies how the capability > to conduct > > MSRP sessions with real-time text is declared so that session=20 > > negotiation can make decisions on what transport protocol > to use and > > how to route the calls to get the desired support for text=20 > > communication. > >=20 > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-tex t-transmission > -00.txt > >=20 > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > message to > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > the body of > > the message. > > You can also visit > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > to change your subscription settings. > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the=20 > > username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After=20 > > logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > "get draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > >=20 > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > >=20 > > Send a message to: > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > In the body type: > > "FILE > /internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > >=20 > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant > mail readers > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > > how to manipulate these messages. > >=20 > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > > Internet-Draft. > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >=20 > __________ NOD32 2785 (20080111) Information __________ >=20 > Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. > http://www.nod32.com >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >=20 _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple __________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________ Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.nod32.com _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 14 14:39:24 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEV9V-0005Rq-Nk; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:39:21 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEV9U-0005Rj-NO for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:39:20 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEV9U-0005Rb-DV for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:39:20 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEV9T-0003dg-3w for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:39:20 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0EJdFx4003732; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:39:15 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:26:05 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 20:25:16 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268B7F@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <200801141910.m0EJA90C028909@oslproxyp1.tandberg.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Thread-Index: AchVl+8amUpQKL+vQOq4aAuV/aK/sAAIFJkgAEgOlVAAAf2X0AAAVnWQ From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= , "Paul Kyzivat" , "Simple WG" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jan 2008 19:26:05.0814 (UTC) FILETIME=[4EB57960:01C856E3] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e178fd6cb61ffb6940cd878e7fea8606 Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org My fault. The header is fine by me. I just got stuck on the examples = which do not include the header. =20 Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- > From: Gunnar Hellstr=F6m [mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se]=20 >=20 > Geir Arne, >=20 > You say: "you might be required to tag each MSRP message" >=20 > In section 5, item b we have this proposal: >=20 > b. A Content-disposition=3Dimmediate-presentation to be included = in > the MSRP headers in the chunks and messages. =20 >=20 > (This new value of Content-disposition then needs to be=20 > registered by IANA. > ) > Do you regard tat to be a suitable tagging, or do you have=20 > any other mechanism in mind that is possible to use on=20 > text/plain, Charset=3Dutf-8 >=20 > Gunnar > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > Gunnar Hellstr=F6m > Omnitor > gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se > Tel: +46708204288 > www.omnitor.se >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 7:32 PM > To: Gunnar Hellstr=F6m; Paul Kyzivat; Simple WG > Subject: RE: > [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >=20 > Gunnar, >=20 > If packet rate, bandwidth or processing limitations are a=20 > concern, you could think about adding a throttle mechanism.=20 > Like an MSRP method that would request the client to adjust=20 > it's sample rate, or even turn off/on a real time text extension. =20 >=20 > As an MSRP session can be used for many purposes, you might=20 > be required to tag each MSRP message. The relay could then=20 > treat the messages differently on a message by message basis. =20 >=20 > Cheers, > Geir Arne >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > >=20 > > Paul, > > The real-time feature transmitting characters in=20 > time-sampled chunks=20 > > as they are avialable really gives new life to text-IM. Many of the=20 > > annoying drawbacks of traditional sentence-wise IM are resolved by=20 > > this feature. You do not need any presence indicator that the other=20 > > person is typing, when you really whant to know is WHAT is=20 > typed. Here=20 > > you get it. And you do not need to rush composing your message to=20 > > completion so that the other participant shall understand a new=20 > > appearing situation. Your first keystrokes will be=20 > immediately visible=20 > > and make it apparent that you are about to explain the situation. > > There are numerous situations when the real-time text=20 > feature is very=20 > > useful. > >=20 > > But you are right in pointing at issue 4, saying that MSRP=20 > relays may=20 > > need to know that they should avoid buffering an re-combination of=20 > > chunks when the chunks are used for real-time text. Some additional=20 > > rules may be needed for relays. E.g. "do not recombine chunks with=20 > > text/plain contents and less than 10 characters of payload". > >=20 > > Also multi-party sessions, with more than one active user=20 > typing may=20 > > cause an extensive message flow. I have calculated that one message=20 > > flow with three transmissions per second, including relay=20 > addressing,=20 > > takes approximately 17 kbit/s and > > 12 packets / second. With three typers it becomes 51 kbit/s and 36=20 > > packets/s for this session between the relay and the user terminal. > >=20 > > So, an issue 5 might be needed: Is it feasible, regarding bandwidth=20 > > consumption and processing? If not, can something be done=20 > to make this=20 > > important functional enhancement of text-IM feasible? > >=20 > > There is now also a draft available talking more about the=20 > > presentation aspects that gives complementing information: > >=20 > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-textpreview-04.txt > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > Thanks > > Gunnar > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Gunnar Hellstr=F6m > > Omnitor > > gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se > >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:53 AM > > To: Simple WG > > Subject: [Simple] Re: > > I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt > >=20 > > I find this to be pretty interesting. My feeling has been that the=20 > > best chance for pervasive support of real time text is for it to be=20 > > incorporated into a widely used application and protocol.=20 > IM qualifies=20 > > as a widely used application, though MSRP doesn't yet qualify as a=20 > > widely used protocol. > > This could however be synergistic - it might result in some=20 > pressure=20 > > to support MSRP. > >=20 > > BUT the problem mentioned as Issue 4 is potentially fatal.=20 > If relays=20 > > are involved in the session, it is likely that they would think it=20 > > appropriate to buffer and re-chunk the chunks, destroying the real=20 > > time characteristics. I don't see how to avoid this unless=20 > some way to=20 > > negotiate the behavior of relays can be devised. > >=20 > > Also, if relays multiplex multiple MSRP sessions on a=20 > single, that can=20 > > also impact the real time characteristics. > >=20 > > Thanks, > > Paul > >=20 > > Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > > directories. > > >=20 > > > Title : Coding and transmission of text in=20 > > real-time and > > en-bloc mode based on MSRP > > > Author(s) : G. Hellstrom, et al. > > > Filename :=20 > > draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt > > > Pages : 15 > > > Date : 2008-01-09 > > >=20 > > > This memo describes conventions for exchange and > > presentation of text > > > in SIP sessions through the Message Session Relay Protocol > > MSRP. It > > > covers two different methods for taking the initiative to=20 > transmit. > > > These methods are timer initiated real-time text and user=20 > requested=20 > > > en-bloc transmission in Messaging. The document gives specific=20 > > > guidance on handling of text presentation and presentation > > control of > > > conversational sessions. It specifies how the capability > > to conduct > > > MSRP sessions with real-time text is declared so that session=20 > > > negotiation can make decisions on what transport protocol > > to use and > > > how to route the calls to get the desired support for text=20 > > > communication. > > >=20 > > > A URL for this Internet-Draft is: > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-tex > t-transmission > > -00.txt > > >=20 > > > To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a > > message to > > > i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in > > the body of > > > the message. > > > You can also visit > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce > > > to change your subscription settings. > > >=20 > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP.=20 > Login with the=20 > > > username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After=20 > > > logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then > > > "get draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > > >=20 > > > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 > > > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 > > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > > >=20 > > > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. > > >=20 > > > Send a message to: > > > mailserv@ietf.org. > > > In the body type: > > > "FILE > > /internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". > > >=20 > > > NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in > > > MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this > > > feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" > > > command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or > > > a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant > > mail readers > > > exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with > > > "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split > > > up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on > > > how to manipulate these messages. > > >=20 > > > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 > > > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 > > > Internet-Draft. > > >=20 > > >=20 > > >=20 > >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- > > >=20 > > > _______________________________________________ > > > I-D-Announce mailing list > > > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > >=20 > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > Simple mailing list > > Simple@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > >=20 > > __________ NOD32 2785 (20080111) Information __________ > >=20 > > Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.nod32.com > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > >=20 > > _______________________________________________ > > Simple mailing list > > Simple@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >=20 > __________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________ >=20 > Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. > http://www.nod32.com >=20 >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From temptinglyd069@socalerotica.com Mon Jan 14 15:58:23 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEWNz-00068P-E3 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:58:23 -0500 Received: from mail.apalliance.com.au ([203.166.45.38]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEWNy-0006Dy-9P for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:58:23 -0500 Received: from [203.166.45.38] by mail.socalerotica.com; Tue, 14 Jan 2008 04:58:21 +0800 From: Timothy To: Subject: AmpleBodypartJonas Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2008 04:58:21 +0800 Message-ID: <01c8566a$15a95480$262da6cb@temptinglyd069> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 GilbertoPhallusMan-sized http://www.morecartes.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 14 17:32:15 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEXqm-0003Fs-GN; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:32:12 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEXql-0003Bn-F8 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:32:11 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEXql-0003Be-2j for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:32:11 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEXqk-0008Mc-1p for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:32:10 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,284,1196658000"; d="scan'208";a="83326789" Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jan 2008 17:32:10 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0EMW9EO014079; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:32:09 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0EMVWuw000057; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 22:32:04 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:49 -0500 Received: from [10.86.243.168] ([10.86.243.168]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:48 -0500 Message-ID: <478BE2D5.6010208@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:49 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geir Arne Sandbakken Subject: Re: [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268B7F@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268B7F@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Jan 2008 22:31:48.0920 (UTC) FILETIME=[40848380:01C856FD] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=9649; t=1200349929; x=1201213929; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]Re=3AI-DAction=3Adraft-hellstro m-simple-text-transmission-00.txt |Sender:=20 |To:=20Geir=20Arne=20Sandbakken=20; bh=gYqHR+0pqg5mTN8MUy+7/8vroNoS0hZktqXiY/VFr/E=; b=Aj4OJ4XNvQMmsulvdmoUF4LPMi5UU1zrPlc7B9i7bSU4N0jEZt/FW27g+2 t3ImmhDFnUvhCj5/TCf2up5SMzMWWEZfdRmHjCA9Z1TeHoy0Byj00wrT/+Ra zaPJOlbgR5; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e178fd6cb61ffb6940cd878e7fea8606 Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= , Simple WG X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org The C-D provides a possible way to detect that special handling is required on this message. But it doesn't provide any assurance that relays will provide that processing. Something else is still required to deal with that. Paul Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > My fault. The header is fine by me. I just got stuck on the examples which do not include the header. > > Geir Arne > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gunnar Hellström [mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se] >> >> Geir Arne, >> >> You say: "you might be required to tag each MSRP message" >> >> In section 5, item b we have this proposal: >> >> b. A Content-disposition=immediate-presentation to be included in >> the MSRP headers in the chunks and messages. >> >> (This new value of Content-disposition then needs to be >> registered by IANA. >> ) >> Do you regard tat to be a suitable tagging, or do you have >> any other mechanism in mind that is possible to use on >> text/plain, Charset=utf-8 >> >> Gunnar >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Gunnar Hellström >> Omnitor >> gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se >> Tel: +46708204288 >> www.omnitor.se >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 7:32 PM >> To: Gunnar Hellström; Paul Kyzivat; Simple WG >> Subject: RE: >> [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >> >> Gunnar, >> >> If packet rate, bandwidth or processing limitations are a >> concern, you could think about adding a throttle mechanism. >> Like an MSRP method that would request the client to adjust >> it's sample rate, or even turn off/on a real time text extension. >> >> As an MSRP session can be used for many purposes, you might >> be required to tag each MSRP message. The relay could then >> treat the messages differently on a message by message basis. >> >> Cheers, >> Geir Arne >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> Paul, >>> The real-time feature transmitting characters in >> time-sampled chunks >>> as they are avialable really gives new life to text-IM. Many of the >>> annoying drawbacks of traditional sentence-wise IM are resolved by >>> this feature. You do not need any presence indicator that the other >>> person is typing, when you really whant to know is WHAT is >> typed. Here >>> you get it. And you do not need to rush composing your message to >>> completion so that the other participant shall understand a new >>> appearing situation. Your first keystrokes will be >> immediately visible >>> and make it apparent that you are about to explain the situation. >>> There are numerous situations when the real-time text >> feature is very >>> useful. >>> >>> But you are right in pointing at issue 4, saying that MSRP >> relays may >>> need to know that they should avoid buffering an re-combination of >>> chunks when the chunks are used for real-time text. Some additional >>> rules may be needed for relays. E.g. "do not recombine chunks with >>> text/plain contents and less than 10 characters of payload". >>> >>> Also multi-party sessions, with more than one active user >> typing may >>> cause an extensive message flow. I have calculated that one message >>> flow with three transmissions per second, including relay >> addressing, >>> takes approximately 17 kbit/s and >>> 12 packets / second. With three typers it becomes 51 kbit/s and 36 >>> packets/s for this session between the relay and the user terminal. >>> >>> So, an issue 5 might be needed: Is it feasible, regarding bandwidth >>> consumption and processing? If not, can something be done >> to make this >>> important functional enhancement of text-IM feasible? >>> >>> There is now also a draft available talking more about the >>> presentation aspects that gives complementing information: >>> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-textpreview-04.txt >>> >>> >>> Thanks >>> Gunnar >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Gunnar Hellström >>> Omnitor >>> gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >>> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:53 AM >>> To: Simple WG >>> Subject: [Simple] Re: >>> I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >>> >>> I find this to be pretty interesting. My feeling has been that the >>> best chance for pervasive support of real time text is for it to be >>> incorporated into a widely used application and protocol. >> IM qualifies >>> as a widely used application, though MSRP doesn't yet qualify as a >>> widely used protocol. >>> This could however be synergistic - it might result in some >> pressure >>> to support MSRP. >>> >>> BUT the problem mentioned as Issue 4 is potentially fatal. >> If relays >>> are involved in the session, it is likely that they would think it >>> appropriate to buffer and re-chunk the chunks, destroying the real >>> time characteristics. I don't see how to avoid this unless >> some way to >>> negotiate the behavior of relays can be devised. >>> >>> Also, if relays multiplex multiple MSRP sessions on a >> single, that can >>> also impact the real time characteristics. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Paul >>> >>> Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>> directories. >>>> Title : Coding and transmission of text in >>> real-time and >>> en-bloc mode based on MSRP >>>> Author(s) : G. Hellstrom, et al. >>>> Filename : >>> draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >>>> Pages : 15 >>>> Date : 2008-01-09 >>>> >>>> This memo describes conventions for exchange and >>> presentation of text >>>> in SIP sessions through the Message Session Relay Protocol >>> MSRP. It >>>> covers two different methods for taking the initiative to >> transmit. >>>> These methods are timer initiated real-time text and user >> requested >>>> en-bloc transmission in Messaging. The document gives specific >>>> guidance on handling of text presentation and presentation >>> control of >>>> conversational sessions. It specifies how the capability >>> to conduct >>>> MSRP sessions with real-time text is declared so that session >>>> negotiation can make decisions on what transport protocol >>> to use and >>>> how to route the calls to get the desired support for text >>>> communication. >>>> >>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-tex >> t-transmission >>> -00.txt >>>> To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >>> message to >>>> i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >>> the body of >>>> the message. >>>> You can also visit >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >>>> to change your subscription settings. >>>> >>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. >> Login with the >>>> username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After >>>> logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then >>>> "get draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". >>>> >>>> A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in >>>> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or >>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>>> >>>> Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >>>> >>>> Send a message to: >>>> mailserv@ietf.org. >>>> In the body type: >>>> "FILE >>> /internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". >>>> NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >>>> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this >>>> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" >>>> command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or >>>> a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant >>> mail readers >>>> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >>>> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split >>>> up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on >>>> how to manipulate these messages. >>>> >>>> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader >>>> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the >>>> Internet-Draft. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> -- >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> I-D-Announce mailing list >>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Simple mailing list >>> Simple@ietf.org >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >>> >>> __________ NOD32 2785 (20080111) Information __________ >>> >>> Detta meddelande är genomsökt av NOD32 Antivirus. >>> http://www.nod32.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Simple mailing list >>> Simple@ietf.org >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Simple mailing list >> Simple@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >> >> __________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________ >> >> Detta meddelande är genomsökt av NOD32 Antivirus. >> http://www.nod32.com >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From xsrr@bodycare.com.au Mon Jan 14 17:51:18 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEY9G-0002hF-Fd; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:51:18 -0500 Received: from a83-132-212-147.cpe.netcabo.pt ([83.132.212.147] helo=nuno-pc.netcabo.pt) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEY9D-0000Nw-I3; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:51:16 -0500 Message-ID: <01c85636$cc8bdd00$93d48453@xsrr> From: "Rosendo Proctor" To: Subject: Re: Rosendo Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2008 22:51:14 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="us-ascii"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Spam: Not detected X-Spam-Score: 3.9 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 We sell only popular med s. Dont miss out on this huge savings http://fastexciting.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 14 18:05:37 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEYN3-0002p7-Cv; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:05:33 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEYN1-0002ow-RI for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:05:31 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEYN1-0002oo-GD for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:05:31 -0500 Received: from ebru.winwebhosting.com ([74.54.111.226]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEYN0-0000i5-Sd for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:05:31 -0500 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSLT41xp) by ebru.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JEYMr-0003yi-56; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:05:21 -0600 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Geir Arne Sandbakken'" , "'Hisham Khartabil'" References: <66cd252f0801071415p2b1d61cfr221f114f8a4fa929@mail.gmail.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB045@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 18:05:23 -0500 Message-ID: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB045@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: AchRetYygnWFMDuSQ96jhMhXTXOxVgAa46sgAUaDSgA= X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ebru.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f66b12316365a3fe519e75911daf28a8 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an address. We don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general use cases harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a nickname. They are distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the nickname for the UI. There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly represent the same user in the chat. The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, you can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a URI to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client has to know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed nick@domain as an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't restrict addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes everything more complex. We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the user part of a URI. Just don't do that. A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some forms of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but I don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer to a display name than a user part. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM > To: Hisham Khartabil > Cc: simple@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > Comments inline. > > > > [snip snip] > > > render the domain part of it to make it so. > > > > I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of 2 > > participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the > > application to distinguish them for the user. > > > > The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the chatroom > > service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. > > Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to be > inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason for > this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the clients > acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. > Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside a > domain complicates the implementation of the server. > > > > That would probably violate > > > what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering > mechanisms > > > has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). > > > > Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the application? I > > think not. > > I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested method > to avoid having to render a nickname like this: > nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com > > > [snip snip] > > > > This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of the > > > winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > > > beertasters-chat@example.org. > > > > Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been a > > while though). There were a few people against what you just proposed > > due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both > > chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. > > The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the UI > would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a > domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? > > Geir Arne > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 14 19:27:25 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEZeC-0001X9-T0; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:20 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEZeC-0001X4-2I for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:20 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEZeB-0001Wv-Mq for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:19 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEZeB-0002VJ-0h for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:19 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,284,1196658000"; d="scan'208";a="83334621" Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Jan 2008 19:27:19 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0F0RI6U021079; Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:18 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0F0R6NA028715; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 00:27:14 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:11 -0500 Received: from [10.86.243.168] ([10.86.243.168]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:11 -0500 Message-ID: <478BFDE0.3060906@cisco.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 19:27:12 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Rosen Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope References: <66cd252f0801071415p2b1d61cfr221f114f8a4fa929@mail.gmail.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB010DB045@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> In-Reply-To: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jan 2008 00:27:11.0435 (UTC) FILETIME=[5EA879B0:01C8570D] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=5317; t=1200356838; x=1201220838; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Nickname=20scope |Sender:=20 |To:=20Brian=20Rosen=20; bh=kesqe70m2FltP9YwNFC24fuR58i96BTAvqJaAnI+RlM=; b=oPaHSK1L7CGIJaJoudq07Uyio+4xb+xblYdUNgwhVbwj5FwoMY59v/4cNI lmNYmZHrw5kivLNrP5Pgg3TLTj7c9erOqye0xPNpiQxJDHKJIBp37XnlEoOP XNO053w/wf; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 36c793b20164cfe75332aa66ddb21196 Cc: 'Geir Arne Sandbakken' , simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I don't have any particular problem I can see with what you say, *except* that for a nickname to *be* unique we need to know who/what guarantees that uniqueness. IOW a nickname must have a scope and something that is responsible for that scope. Either that scope is implicit, and up to the focus to determine, or else it is explicit. Having an implicit scope is IMO overly restrictive, but I know not all agree with me. I think what we had agreed is that for SIMPLE we will not provide any mechanism to request a new nickname in any but an implicit scope associated with the focus, nor would we specify how use of nicknames in other scopes would be authenticated, but we would *allow* nicknames in other scopes, if the focus has some way to authenticate that usage. The assumption was that the rest would be worked out by xcon. But the end result of that is a need to identify a nickname and the scope in which the nickname is defined. I have been thinking of that being denoted by @. Of course it need not be that way - there are other ways of conveying both pieces of info. And, aesthetics aside, that would be fine with me. Paul Brian Rosen wrote: > You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an address. We > don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general use cases > harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a nickname. They are > distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the nickname for the UI. > There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly > represent the same user in the chat. > > The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. > The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. > > Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, you > can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a URI > to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client has to > know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the > nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed nick@domain as > an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't restrict > addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes everything > more complex. > > We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the user > part of a URI. Just don't do that. > > A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some forms > of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but I > don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer to a > display name than a user part. > > Brian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM >> To: Hisham Khartabil >> Cc: simple@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope >> >> Comments inline. >> >>>> [snip snip] >>>> render the domain part of it to make it so. >>> I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of 2 >>> participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the >>> application to distinguish them for the user. >>> >>> The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the chatroom >>> service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. >> Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to be >> inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason for >> this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the clients >> acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. >> Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside a >> domain complicates the implementation of the server. >> >>>> That would probably violate >>>> what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering >> mechanisms >>>> has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). >>> Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the application? I >>> think not. >> I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested method >> to avoid having to render a nickname like this: >> nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com >> >>> [snip snip] >>> >>> This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of the >>>> winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the >>>> beertasters-chat@example.org. >>> Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been a >>> while though). There were a few people against what you just proposed >>> due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both >>> chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. >> The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the UI >> would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a >> domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? >> >> Geir Arne >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Simple mailing list >> Simple@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 06:48:02 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEkGq-0001Bm-U8; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 06:47:56 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEkGp-0001Be-B2 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 06:47:55 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEkGp-0001BW-1E for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 06:47:55 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEkGo-0003Ax-34 for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 06:47:55 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0FBlkQZ003064; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:47:46 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:47:46 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:46:55 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268D03@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchRetYygnWFMDuSQ96jhMhXTXOxVgAa46sgAUaDSgAAFdn+gA== From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Hisham Khartabil" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jan 2008 11:47:46.0713 (UTC) FILETIME=[72616890:01C8576C] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2ed806e2f53ff1a061ad4f97e00345ac Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I thought I had explicitly argued against the nickname being a URI, and that having such a nickname URI routable and changeable during the conference will seriously break things. What I do have argued for is that the nickname string used for display purposes and easy reference to participants - needs to be associated to a scope. The purpose of the scope is to have the nickname string unique inside of it. IMHO the uniqueness aspect is what differentiates display names and nicknames. =20 The scope is currently proposed to be a URI, but the nickname string itself is *not* part of it. We have two pieces of information; the nickname string and the nickname scope URI. This allows for unique nickname strings inside the scope of a conference URI (chatroom) like chat34@example.org. Having a nickname scope URI will also support scoping inside of domains or IP addresses - whatever you can represent as a URI.=20 What we are constructing is something new. It's not a display name, it is not a SIP AOR, and not a routable SIP URI pretending to be a nickname. We have a nickname string which is unique inside a scope. Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >=20 > You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an address. > We don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general use > cases harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a nickname.=20 > They are distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the nickname > for the UI. > > There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly > represent the same user in the chat. >=20 > The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. > The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. >=20 > Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, you > can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a URI > to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client has > to > know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the > nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed nick@domain as > an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't > restrict > addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes > everything > more complex. >=20 > We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the user > part of a URI. Just don't do that. >=20 > A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some > forms > of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but I > don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer to > a > display name than a user part. >=20 > Brian >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM > > To: Hisham Khartabil > > Cc: simple@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > > > Comments inline. > > > > > > [snip snip] > > > > render the domain part of it to make it so. > > > > > > I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of 2 > > > participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the > > > application to distinguish them for the user. > > > > > > The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the chatroom > > > service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. > > > > Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to be > > inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason for > > this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the clients > > acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. > > Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside a > > domain complicates the implementation of the server. > > > > > > That would probably violate > > > > what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering > > mechanisms > > > > has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). > > > > > > Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the application? I > > > think not. > > > > I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested method > > to avoid having to render a nickname like this: > > nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com > > > > > [snip snip] > > > > > > This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of the > > > > winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > > > > beertasters-chat@example.org. > > > > > > Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been a > > > while though). There were a few people against what you just proposed > > > due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both > > > chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. > > > > The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the UI > > would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a > > domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? > > > > Geir Arne > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Simple mailing list > > Simple@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 12:28:32 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEpaN-0005f0-FI; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:28:27 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEpaL-0005UR-Vx for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:28:26 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEpaL-0005Nn-Ib for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:28:25 -0500 Received: from s87.loopia.se ([194.9.94.113]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEpaJ-00010s-Og for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:28:25 -0500 Received: (qmail 80844 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2008 17:28:20 -0000 Received: from s34.loopia.se (HELO s57.loopia.se) ([194.9.94.70]) (envelope-sender ) by s87.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 15 Jan 2008 17:28:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 41428 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2008 17:28:20 -0000 Received: from h240n1fls34o265.telia.com (HELO GunnarH) (gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se@[213.64.232.240]) (envelope-sender ) by s57.loopia.se (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 15 Jan 2008 17:28:20 -0000 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= To: "'Paul Kyzivat'" , "'Geir Arne Sandbakken'" References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268B7F@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <478BE2D5.6010208@cisco.com> Subject: RE: [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:28:27 +0100 Message-ID: <00f701c8579c$09fba2e0$d800a8c0@GunnarH> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <478BE2D5.6010208@cisco.com> Thread-Index: AchW/VCo1U9gpMAbSmuc9iW3I3EEFgAnHDkQ X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4fc59e88b356924367ae169e6a06365d Cc: 'Simple WG' X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Paul, Here is another clue, that also is not sufficient: Tere is a new draft proposing registration of the media feature tag sip.real-time-text: Title : Registration of the Real-time-text Media Feature Tag=20 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-text-turntaking-01.tx= t A SIP UA having the capability to support real-time-text through any transport should indicate that by real-time-text=3Dfull in the contact = header. Then the UA:s can negotiate use of e.g. MSRP for real-time-text by = checking the proposed a=3Dreal-time-text parameter of the sdp for MSRP.=20 That would make both UAs to include only real-time capable relays in the chunk addressing. But how would they know what relay to use except through users = configuring their service environment by hand? Is there any feature support declaration on relays available for = inspection when you search for relays? -------------------- When discussing this topic, it might be good to know that there is a set = of drafts covering different aspects of the real-time-text concept.=20 1. Title : Registration of the Real-time-text Media Feature Tag=20 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-text-turntaking-01.tx= t 2. Title : Presentation of Text Conversation in realtime and en-bloc = form http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-textpreview-04.txt 3. Title : Text media handling in RTP based real-time and message conferences http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-text-conference-00.tx= t 4. Title : Real-time text interworking between PSTN and IP networks http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-txtgwy-00.txt 5. Title : Framework for real-time text over IP using the Session = Initiation Protocol (SIP) http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-toip-08.txt Gunnar=20 ------------------------------------------------------------------- Gunnar Hellstr=F6m Omnitor gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se Tel: +46708204288 www.omnitor.se -----Original Message----- From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com]=20 Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 11:32 PM To: Geir Arne Sandbakken Cc: Gunnar Hellstr=F6m; Simple WG Subject: Re: [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt The C-D provides a possible way to detect that special handling is = required on this message. But it doesn't provide any assurance that relays will provide that processing. Something else is still required to deal with = that. Paul Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > My fault. The header is fine by me. I just got stuck on the examples = which do not include the header. =20 >=20 > Geir Arne >=20 >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Gunnar Hellstr=F6m [mailto:gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se] >> >> Geir Arne, >> >> You say: "you might be required to tag each MSRP message" >> >> In section 5, item b we have this proposal: >> >> b. A Content-disposition=3Dimmediate-presentation to be included = in >> the MSRP headers in the chunks and messages. =20 >> >> (This new value of Content-disposition then needs to be registered by = >> IANA. >> ) >> Do you regard tat to be a suitable tagging, or do you have any other=20 >> mechanism in mind that is possible to use on text/plain,=20 >> Charset=3Dutf-8 >> >> Gunnar >> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Gunnar Hellstr=F6m >> Omnitor >> gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se >> Tel: +46708204288 >> www.omnitor.se >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 7:32 PM >> To: Gunnar Hellstr=F6m; Paul Kyzivat; Simple WG >> Subject: RE: >> [Simple]Re:I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >> >> Gunnar, >> >> If packet rate, bandwidth or processing limitations are a concern, =20 >> you could think about adding a throttle mechanism. >> Like an MSRP method that would request the client to adjust it's=20 >> sample rate, or even turn off/on a real time text extension. >> >> As an MSRP session can be used for many purposes, you might be=20 >> required to tag each MSRP message. The relay could then treat the=20 >> messages differently on a message by message basis. >> >> Cheers, >> Geir Arne >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> >>> Paul, >>> The real-time feature transmitting characters in >> time-sampled chunks >>> as they are avialable really gives new life to text-IM. Many of the=20 >>> annoying drawbacks of traditional sentence-wise IM are resolved by=20 >>> this feature. You do not need any presence indicator that the other=20 >>> person is typing, when you really whant to know is WHAT is >> typed. Here >>> you get it. And you do not need to rush composing your message to=20 >>> completion so that the other participant shall understand a new=20 >>> appearing situation. Your first keystrokes will be >> immediately visible >>> and make it apparent that you are about to explain the situation. >>> There are numerous situations when the real-time text >> feature is very >>> useful. >>> >>> But you are right in pointing at issue 4, saying that MSRP >> relays may >>> need to know that they should avoid buffering an re-combination of=20 >>> chunks when the chunks are used for real-time text. Some additional=20 >>> rules may be needed for relays. E.g. "do not recombine chunks with=20 >>> text/plain contents and less than 10 characters of payload". >>> >>> Also multi-party sessions, with more than one active user >> typing may >>> cause an extensive message flow. I have calculated that one message=20 >>> flow with three transmissions per second, including relay >> addressing, >>> takes approximately 17 kbit/s and >>> 12 packets / second. With three typers it becomes 51 kbit/s and 36=20 >>> packets/s for this session between the relay and the user terminal. >>> >>> So, an issue 5 might be needed: Is it feasible, regarding bandwidth=20 >>> consumption and processing? If not, can something be done >> to make this >>> important functional enhancement of text-IM feasible? >>> >>> There is now also a draft available talking more about the=20 >>> presentation aspects that gives complementing information: >>> >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-textpreview-04.tx >> t >>> >>> >>> Thanks >>> Gunnar >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Gunnar Hellstr=F6m >>> Omnitor >>> gunnar.hellstrom@omnitor.se >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >>> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2008 4:53 AM >>> To: Simple WG >>> Subject: [Simple] Re: >>> I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >>> >>> I find this to be pretty interesting. My feeling has been that the=20 >>> best chance for pervasive support of real time text is for it to be=20 >>> incorporated into a widely used application and protocol. >> IM qualifies >>> as a widely used application, though MSRP doesn't yet qualify as a=20 >>> widely used protocol. >>> This could however be synergistic - it might result in some >> pressure >>> to support MSRP. >>> >>> BUT the problem mentioned as Issue 4 is potentially fatal.=20 >> If relays >>> are involved in the session, it is likely that they would think it=20 >>> appropriate to buffer and re-chunk the chunks, destroying the real=20 >>> time characteristics. I don't see how to avoid this unless >> some way to >>> negotiate the behavior of relays can be devised. >>> >>> Also, if relays multiplex multiple MSRP sessions on a >> single, that can >>> also impact the real time characteristics. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Paul >>> >>> Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >>> directories. >>>> Title : Coding and transmission of text in=20 >>> real-time and >>> en-bloc mode based on MSRP >>>> Author(s) : G. Hellstrom, et al. >>>> Filename :=20 >>> draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >>>> Pages : 15 >>>> Date : 2008-01-09 >>>> >>>> This memo describes conventions for exchange and >>> presentation of text >>>> in SIP sessions through the Message Session Relay Protocol >>> MSRP. It >>>> covers two different methods for taking the initiative to >> transmit. >>>> These methods are timer initiated real-time text and user >> requested >>>> en-bloc transmission in Messaging. The document gives specific=20 >>>> guidance on handling of text presentation and presentation >>> control of >>>> conversational sessions. It specifies how the capability >>> to conduct >>>> MSRP sessions with real-time text is declared so that session=20 >>>> negotiation can make decisions on what transport protocol >>> to use and >>>> how to route the calls to get the desired support for text=20 >>>> communication. >>>> >>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >>>> >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-tex >> t-transmission >>> -00.txt >>>> To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a >>> message to >>>> i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in >>> the body of >>>> the message. >>>> You can also visit >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce >>>> to change your subscription settings. >>>> >>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP.=20 >> Login with the >>>> username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After=20 >>>> logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then >>>> "get draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". >>>> >>>> A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in=20 >>>> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or=20 >>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >>>> >>>> Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. >>>> >>>> Send a message to: >>>> mailserv@ietf.org. >>>> In the body type: >>>> "FILE >>> /internet-drafts/draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt". >>>> NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in >>>> MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this >>>> feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" >>>> command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or >>>> a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant >>> mail readers >>>> exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with >>>> "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split >>>> up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on >>>> how to manipulate these messages. >>>> >>>> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader=20 >>>> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the=20 >>>> Internet-Draft. >>>> >>>> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> - >>>> -- >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> I-D-Announce mailing list >>>> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Simple mailing list >>> Simple@ietf.org >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >>> >>> __________ NOD32 2785 (20080111) Information __________ >>> >>> Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. >>> http://www.nod32.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Simple mailing list >>> Simple@ietf.org >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Simple mailing list >> Simple@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >> >> __________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________ >> >> Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. >> http://www.nod32.com >> >> >> >=20 __________ NOD32 2789 (20080114) Information __________ Detta meddelande =E4r genoms=F6kt av NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.nod32.com _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 13:55:13 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEqwH-0008Hk-Ft; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:55:09 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEqwF-0008He-Pj for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:55:07 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEqwF-0008HW-FK for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:55:07 -0500 Received: from ebru.winwebhosting.com ([74.54.111.226]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEqwE-000372-Fd for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:55:07 -0500 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSLT41xp) by ebru.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JEqw6-0006st-TN; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 12:54:59 -0600 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Geir Arne Sandbakken'" , "'Hisham Khartabil'" References: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268D03@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:55:00 -0500 Message-ID: <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268D03@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: AchRetYygnWFMDuSQ96jhMhXTXOxVgAa46sgAUaDSgAAFdn+gAAS//GA X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ebru.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f2984bf50fb52a9e56055f779793d783 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Yeah, this is getting somewhat more confusing instead of less confusing to me. One of the purposes of a nickname asserted is linked with the notion of anonymity. If we allowed nick@domain, we have an anonymous URI. There is a problem here however; the conference event package would yield the real AoR unless that was an anonymous URI. So it would seem that using a nick for an anonymous URI is not sufficient; the conference event package would have to be changed or the URI in the roster would have to be an anonymous URI. I think the latter is the best answer. There is a need to define the scope of uniqueness for a nickname. We all agree on that point. The text of the draft suggests that since the nickname is unique in the domain, nick@domain is unique, and proposes to make a URI out of that. I think this is too confusing, and we should just drop the entire notion of creating a URI out of the nick; just use whatever is in the conference roster. We're still left with defining the scope for which the nick is unique. This came up before. The generalized mechanism makes the domain explicit, the idea for MSRP chat was to make the domain something really simple. The simplest is the domain of the chat. The largest it could be is the domain of the server. Remember that although it's possible that a chat uri is chat@chatid.example.com, it could also be chatid@example.com. You can't use the domain of the focus as the domain of the chat. The simplest mechanism to define for MSRP chat is that the nick is unique within the domain of the conference (chat) URI. That would be the conference for the former example, and the server for the latter example. If that bothers you too much, uniqueness to the chat itself is fine with me. So a concrete proposal: 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use the URI in the roster. 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the chat itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants to. The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:47 AM > To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil > Cc: simple@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > I thought I had explicitly argued against the nickname being a URI, and > that having such a nickname URI routable and changeable during the > conference will seriously break things. > > What I do have argued for is that the nickname string used for display > purposes and easy reference to participants - needs to be associated to > a scope. The purpose of the scope is to have the nickname string unique > inside of it. IMHO the uniqueness aspect is what differentiates display > names and nicknames. > > The scope is currently proposed to be a URI, but the nickname string > itself is *not* part of it. We have two pieces of information; the > nickname string and the nickname scope URI. This allows for unique > nickname strings inside the scope of a conference URI (chatroom) like > chat34@example.org. Having a nickname scope URI will also support > scoping inside of domains or IP addresses - whatever you can represent > as a URI. > > What we are constructing is something new. It's not a display name, it > is not a SIP AOR, and not a routable SIP URI pretending to be a > nickname. We have a nickname string which is unique inside a scope. > > Geir Arne > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > > > You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an > address. > > We don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general > use > > cases harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a > nickname. > > They are distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the > nickname > for the UI. > > > > There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly > > represent the same user in the chat. > > > > The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. > > The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. > > > > Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, > you > > can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a > URI > > to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client > has > > to > > know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the > > nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed > nick@domain as > > an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't > > restrict > > addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes > > everything > > more complex. > > > > We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the > user > > part of a URI. Just don't do that. > > > > A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some > > forms > > of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but > I > > don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer > to > > a > > display name than a user part. > > > > Brian > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM > > > To: Hisham Khartabil > > > Cc: simple@ietf.org > > > Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > > > > > Comments inline. > > > > > > > > [snip snip] > > > > > render the domain part of it to make it so. > > > > > > > > I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of > 2 > > > > participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the > > > > application to distinguish them for the user. > > > > > > > > The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the > chatroom > > > > service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. > > > > > > Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to > be > > > inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason > for > > > this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the > clients > > > acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. > > > Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside > a > > > domain complicates the implementation of the server. > > > > > > > > That would probably violate > > > > > what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering > > > mechanisms > > > > > has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). > > > > > > > > Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the > application? I > > > > think not. > > > > > > I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested > method > > > to avoid having to render a nickname like this: > > > nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com > > > > > > > [snip snip] > > > > > > > > This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of > the > > > > > winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > > > > > beertasters-chat@example.org. > > > > > > > > Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been > a > > > > while though). There were a few people against what you just > proposed > > > > due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both > > > > chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. > > > > > > The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the > UI > > > would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a > > > domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? > > > > > > Geir Arne > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Simple mailing list > > > Simple@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 16:27:10 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtJ1-00008v-9n; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:47 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtIy-00008p-Hx for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:44 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtIy-00006K-3l for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:44 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtIx-00070V-4E for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:44 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,289,1196658000"; d="scan'208";a="83436021" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Jan 2008 16:26:25 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0FLQPHS015048; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:25 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0FLQCuk009617; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:26:25 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:05 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.133] ([161.44.174.133]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:04 -0500 Message-ID: <478D24ED.7030003@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:26:05 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Rosen Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope References: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268D03@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> In-Reply-To: <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 15 Jan 2008 21:26:04.0842 (UTC) FILETIME=[3C13B8A0:01C857BD] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=9139; t=1200432385; x=1201296385; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Nickname=20scope |Sender:=20 |To:=20Brian=20Rosen=20; bh=m8dmHXPS/TqUM2xR2WIpHLLAKRphXejLmNcjjkesWv0=; b=SalJvUhGOCYsPn7Zkw8w7lqGBxR+9rdet52oExNfmyArgg766POPW7FHT5 7Tr8AHl2JzPmdNsZ5WXS0c+Z/EZJ1xRI1mF8VIG3FlE/WPe5s1OdfXD5kaBm daIFsi+Vgy; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d008c19e97860b8641c1851f84665a75 Cc: 'Geir Arne Sandbakken' , simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Brian, My concern is that what is done for simple be upward compatible with what is done for xcon. Simple may restrict the domain of uniqueness of the nickname to whatever scope the focus wants it to be. That won't result in any ambiguity as long as the conference really operates under the simple rules. But xcon will hopefully allow nicknames defined in different scopes. Thus there could be two users in an xcon conference with nicknames that are the same except for being defined in different scopes. How will that be rendered to a user that only understands the simple rules? It will simply see two users with the same nickname. To avoid that eventuality I think simple rules must recognize that nicknames have a scope, even if you can't request a particularly scoped nickname. And the UIs must be prepared to do something sensible in that case. Paul Brian Rosen wrote: > Yeah, this is getting somewhat more confusing instead of less confusing to > me. > > One of the purposes of a nickname asserted is linked with the notion of > anonymity. If we allowed nick@domain, we have an anonymous URI. There is a > problem here however; the conference event package would yield the real AoR > unless that was an anonymous URI. So it would seem that using a nick for an > anonymous URI is not sufficient; the conference event package would have to > be changed or the URI in the roster would have to be an anonymous URI. I > think the latter is the best answer. > > There is a need to define the scope of uniqueness for a nickname. We all > agree on that point. The text of the draft suggests that since the nickname > is unique in the domain, nick@domain is unique, and proposes to make a URI > out of that. I think this is too confusing, and we should just drop the > entire notion of creating a URI out of the nick; just use whatever is in the > conference roster. > > We're still left with defining the scope for which the nick is unique. This > came up before. The generalized mechanism makes the domain explicit, the > idea for MSRP chat was to make the domain something really simple. The > simplest is the domain of the chat. The largest it could be is the domain > of the server. Remember that although it's possible that a chat uri is > chat@chatid.example.com, it could also be chatid@example.com. You can't use > the domain of the focus as the domain of the chat. The simplest mechanism > to define for MSRP chat is that the nick is unique within the domain of the > conference (chat) URI. That would be the conference for the former example, > and the server for the latter example. If that bothers you too much, > uniqueness to the chat itself is fine with me. > > So a concrete proposal: > 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use the URI > in the roster. > 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the chat > itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more > stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants to. > The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. > > Brian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:47 AM >> To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil >> Cc: simple@ietf.org >> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope >> >> I thought I had explicitly argued against the nickname being a URI, and >> that having such a nickname URI routable and changeable during the >> conference will seriously break things. >> >> What I do have argued for is that the nickname string used for display >> purposes and easy reference to participants - needs to be associated to >> a scope. The purpose of the scope is to have the nickname string unique >> inside of it. IMHO the uniqueness aspect is what differentiates display >> names and nicknames. >> >> The scope is currently proposed to be a URI, but the nickname string >> itself is *not* part of it. We have two pieces of information; the >> nickname string and the nickname scope URI. This allows for unique >> nickname strings inside the scope of a conference URI (chatroom) like >> chat34@example.org. Having a nickname scope URI will also support >> scoping inside of domains or IP addresses - whatever you can represent >> as a URI. >> >> What we are constructing is something new. It's not a display name, it >> is not a SIP AOR, and not a routable SIP URI pretending to be a >> nickname. We have a nickname string which is unique inside a scope. >> >> Geir Arne >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >>> >>> You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an >> address. >>> We don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general >> use >>> cases harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a >> nickname. >>> They are distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the >> nickname > for the UI. >>> There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly >>> represent the same user in the chat. >>> >>> The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. >>> The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. >>> >>> Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, >> you >>> can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a >> URI >>> to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client >> has >>> to >>> know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the >>> nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed >> nick@domain as >>> an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't >>> restrict >>> addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes >>> everything >>> more complex. >>> >>> We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the >> user >>> part of a URI. Just don't do that. >>> >>> A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some >>> forms >>> of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but >> I >>> don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer >> to >>> a >>> display name than a user part. >>> >>> Brian >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM >>>> To: Hisham Khartabil >>>> Cc: simple@ietf.org >>>> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope >>>> >>>> Comments inline. >>>> >>>>>> [snip snip] >>>>>> render the domain part of it to make it so. >>>>> I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of >> 2 >>>>> participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the >>>>> application to distinguish them for the user. >>>>> >>>>> The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the >> chatroom >>>>> service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. >>>> Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to >> be >>>> inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason >> for >>>> this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the >> clients >>>> acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. >>>> Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside >> a >>>> domain complicates the implementation of the server. >>>> >>>>>> That would probably violate >>>>>> what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering >>>> mechanisms >>>>>> has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). >>>>> Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the >> application? I >>>>> think not. >>>> I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested >> method >>>> to avoid having to render a nickname like this: >>>> nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com >>>> >>>>> [snip snip] >>>>> >>>>> This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of >> the >>>>>> winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the >>>>>> beertasters-chat@example.org. >>>>> Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been >> a >>>>> while though). There were a few people against what you just >> proposed >>>>> due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both >>>>> chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. >>>> The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the >> UI >>>> would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a >>>> domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? >>>> >>>> Geir Arne >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Simple mailing list >>>> Simple@ietf.org >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 16:56:44 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtly-0003zU-ES; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:56:42 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtlw-0003zM-4n for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:56:40 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtlv-0003zE-Qo; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:56:39 -0500 Received: from ns3.neustar.com ([156.154.24.138]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtlv-0007co-J5; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:56:39 -0500 Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com [10.31.47.10]) by ns3.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D106175AB; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 21:56:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEtlQ-0006Zh-IF; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:56:08 -0500 X-test-idtracker: no To: IETF-Announce From: The IESG Message-Id: Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:56:08 -0500 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] Last Call: draft-ietf-simple-imdn (Instant Message Disposition Notification) to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org The IESG has received a request from the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions WG (simple) to consider the following document: - 'Instant Message Disposition Notification ' as a Proposed Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2008-01-29. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-imdn-06.txt IESG discussion can be tracked via https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_id&dTag=14711&rfc_flag=0 _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From mikej@okanaganskiresorts.com Tue Jan 15 17:19:14 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEu7m-0002pg-6U; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:19:14 -0500 Received: from [189.70.121.34] (helo=home) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEu7k-0000Ck-Uh; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:19:13 -0500 Received: from [189.70.121.34] by mail.okanaganskiresorts.com; Tue, 14 Jan 2008 19:17:56 -0300 Message-ID: <01c856e2$2ac1ca00$227946bd@mikej> From: "Adolfo Boone" To: Subject: Tongue Staircase Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2008 19:17:56 -0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4807.1700 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080115-0, 15/01/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 More than 100,000 men around the world are already fully satisfied with the quality and effectiveness of Man-XL http://cewawuka19599.googlepages.com/index.html From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 18:30:40 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEvEU-0002Td-RA; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:30:14 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEvEU-0002TY-1P for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:30:14 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEvET-0002TQ-No for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:30:13 -0500 Received: from ebru.winwebhosting.com ([74.54.111.226]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEvES-0000xO-Hl for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:30:13 -0500 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSLT41xp) by ebru.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JEvEF-0002ll-8o; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 17:29:59 -0600 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Paul Kyzivat'" References: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268D03@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <478D24ED.7030003@cisco.com> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:30:02 -0500 Message-ID: <026401c857ce$8fb459e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <478D24ED.7030003@cisco.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: AchXvVBv3PXLnwQcSqeZ0pP2IW5EhAADeoYA X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ebru.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f8ee348dcc4be4a59bc395f7cd6343ad Cc: 'Geir Arne Sandbakken' , simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org The problem isn't recognizing scope, the problem is the UI when the nick is the same, but the scope (domain) is different. Then UI has to do something special. In my proposal, there is no URI problem; there is only a UI problem. If we force MSRP chat to deal with multiple nicks, with or without explicit scope, then we fix the problem in the beginning. I like that, but we had a lot of push back on that idea. If MSRP chat clients don't have to do that from the get-go, then I see a couple of alternatives: 1. The server, when it supports the generalized mechanism, can provide a unique nick "fred(2)" when it supplies the roster to the simple client. 2. The server can determine if all parties support the generalized mechanism, and only allow duplicate nicknames if they all can handle it. The former seems to work, the latter probably doesn't because if the order of appearance in the chat was: Smart Client, nick=fred Smart Client, nick=fred Simple Client, nick=george Then the server would initially allow fred to be duplicated, but would have to rescind the permission when the dumb client showed up. Neither solution requires scope to be declared for the simple client. I don't see how making scope explicit now helps the problem. We can have scope be implicitly the domain of the server (e.g. the domain of the conference URI). It could, by policy, further restrict to scope of the chat. That may help the generalized mechanism a little (default domain when none is supplied). It doesn't seem to help the simple client. Either it can handle the UI for duplicate nicks now or it can't ever. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 4:26 PM > To: Brian Rosen > Cc: 'Geir Arne Sandbakken'; 'Hisham Khartabil'; simple@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope > > Brian, > > My concern is that what is done for simple be upward compatible with > what is done for xcon. Simple may restrict the domain of uniqueness of > the nickname to whatever scope the focus wants it to be. That won't > result in any ambiguity as long as the conference really operates under > the simple rules. > > But xcon will hopefully allow nicknames defined in different scopes. > Thus there could be two users in an xcon conference with nicknames that > are the same except for being defined in different scopes. How will that > be rendered to a user that only understands the simple rules? It will > simply see two users with the same nickname. > > To avoid that eventuality I think simple rules must recognize that > nicknames have a scope, even if you can't request a particularly scoped > nickname. And the UIs must be prepared to do something sensible in that > case. > > Paul > > Brian Rosen wrote: > > Yeah, this is getting somewhat more confusing instead of less confusing > to > > me. > > > > One of the purposes of a nickname asserted is linked with the notion of > > anonymity. If we allowed nick@domain, we have an anonymous URI. There > is a > > problem here however; the conference event package would yield the real > AoR > > unless that was an anonymous URI. So it would seem that using a nick > for an > > anonymous URI is not sufficient; the conference event package would have > to > > be changed or the URI in the roster would have to be an anonymous URI. > I > > think the latter is the best answer. > > > > There is a need to define the scope of uniqueness for a nickname. We > all > > agree on that point. The text of the draft suggests that since the > nickname > > is unique in the domain, nick@domain is unique, and proposes to make a > URI > > out of that. I think this is too confusing, and we should just drop the > > entire notion of creating a URI out of the nick; just use whatever is in > the > > conference roster. > > > > We're still left with defining the scope for which the nick is unique. > This > > came up before. The generalized mechanism makes the domain explicit, > the > > idea for MSRP chat was to make the domain something really simple. The > > simplest is the domain of the chat. The largest it could be is the > domain > > of the server. Remember that although it's possible that a chat uri is > > chat@chatid.example.com, it could also be chatid@example.com. You can't > use > > the domain of the focus as the domain of the chat. The simplest > mechanism > > to define for MSRP chat is that the nick is unique within the domain of > the > > conference (chat) URI. That would be the conference for the former > example, > > and the server for the latter example. If that bothers you too much, > > uniqueness to the chat itself is fine with me. > > > > So a concrete proposal: > > 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use the > URI > > in the roster. > > 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the chat > > itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more > > stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants > to. > > The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. > > > > Brian > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > >> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:47 AM > >> To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil > >> Cc: simple@ietf.org > >> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > >> > >> I thought I had explicitly argued against the nickname being a URI, and > >> that having such a nickname URI routable and changeable during the > >> conference will seriously break things. > >> > >> What I do have argued for is that the nickname string used for display > >> purposes and easy reference to participants - needs to be associated to > >> a scope. The purpose of the scope is to have the nickname string > unique > >> inside of it. IMHO the uniqueness aspect is what differentiates > display > >> names and nicknames. > >> > >> The scope is currently proposed to be a URI, but the nickname string > >> itself is *not* part of it. We have two pieces of information; the > >> nickname string and the nickname scope URI. This allows for unique > >> nickname strings inside the scope of a conference URI (chatroom) like > >> chat34@example.org. Having a nickname scope URI will also support > >> scoping inside of domains or IP addresses - whatever you can represent > >> as a URI. > >> > >> What we are constructing is something new. It's not a display name, it > >> is not a SIP AOR, and not a routable SIP URI pretending to be a > >> nickname. We have a nickname string which is unique inside a scope. > >> > >> Geir Arne > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > >>> > >>> You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an > >> address. > >>> We don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general > >> use > >>> cases harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a > >> nickname. > >>> They are distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the > >> nickname > for the UI. > >>> There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly > >>> represent the same user in the chat. > >>> > >>> The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. > >>> The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. > >>> > >>> Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, > >> you > >>> can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a > >> URI > >>> to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client > >> has > >>> to > >>> know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the > >>> nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed > >> nick@domain as > >>> an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't > >>> restrict > >>> addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes > >>> everything > >>> more complex. > >>> > >>> We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the > >> user > >>> part of a URI. Just don't do that. > >>> > >>> A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some > >>> forms > >>> of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but > >> I > >>> don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer > >> to > >>> a > >>> display name than a user part. > >>> > >>> Brian > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM > >>>> To: Hisham Khartabil > >>>> Cc: simple@ietf.org > >>>> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > >>>> > >>>> Comments inline. > >>>> > >>>>>> [snip snip] > >>>>>> render the domain part of it to make it so. > >>>>> I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of > >> 2 > >>>>> participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the > >>>>> application to distinguish them for the user. > >>>>> > >>>>> The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the > >> chatroom > >>>>> service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. > >>>> Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to > >> be > >>>> inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason > >> for > >>>> this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the > >> clients > >>>> acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. > >>>> Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside > >> a > >>>> domain complicates the implementation of the server. > >>>> > >>>>>> That would probably violate > >>>>>> what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering > >>>> mechanisms > >>>>>> has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). > >>>>> Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the > >> application? I > >>>>> think not. > >>>> I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested > >> method > >>>> to avoid having to render a nickname like this: > >>>> nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com > >>>> > >>>>> [snip snip] > >>>>> > >>>>> This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of > >> the > >>>>>> winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > >>>>>> beertasters-chat@example.org. > >>>>> Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been > >> a > >>>>> while though). There were a few people against what you just > >> proposed > >>>>> due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both > >>>>> chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. > >>>> The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the > >> UI > >>>> would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a > >>>> domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? > >>>> > >>>> Geir Arne > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Simple mailing list > >>>> Simple@ietf.org > >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Simple mailing list > > Simple@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 19:28:42 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEw8h-00051D-7k; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:28:19 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEw8f-000516-L8 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:28:17 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEw8f-00050y-8z for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:28:17 -0500 Received: from ro-out-1112.google.com ([72.14.202.183]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEw8d-0002se-FX for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:28:17 -0500 Received: by ro-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id k4so3391252rog.3 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:28:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=J2MBds/De6fKGnhSJ7FgPTDEC2aml9eEddMckexIOkA=; b=lPm0E/Oh5zfLDhXaijPrFEs9zovewrwFuUhla8jSvF7AHWX/wnQxBJxcwsZSPAhTvvz61qhQ5pT+t3XxQ/5m5jd/4ew6YoWa+p8NiD1gKe38G/0G3xFC4/5GaNPocNtSrh0bWGnK+SSklWt9P9Arj6/E8S6CUbqyRLeZQXujE3o= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Gm2/+I5lOlVX5cQvBeYk9+QF849omz46Htgkli24iOpOZaZV69tDgmb5xGbg3HvXbMx3Svt5UsZU/u0rh1pCtDx/c+JfnDfPj35Roh2L8De9lItu5reWEQqJG/+BSBFYSjXlZBQv98kxZLYHby+CzNYfRWvG2JSUr5VS72a24h4= Received: by 10.114.156.1 with SMTP id d1mr118168wae.120.1200443294200; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:28:14 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.15.8 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:28:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <66cd252f0801151628t1bac4064h47b38da0f3378669@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:28:14 +1100 From: "Hisham Khartabil" To: "Brian Rosen" Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope In-Reply-To: <026401c857ce$8fb459e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268D03@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <478D24ED.7030003@cisco.com> <026401c857ce$8fb459e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93b4f10b2112e1468b61e19ea6180478 Cc: Geir Arne Sandbakken , Paul Kyzivat , simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I like Brain's suggestions in his previous email and 1. below. The issue I see for 1. would be the acceptance of vendors to implement SIMPLE specific handling. If we can generalise this, then I think we are set. Hisham On 16/01/2008, Brian Rosen wrote: > The problem isn't recognizing scope, the problem is the UI when the nick is > the same, but the scope (domain) is different. Then UI has to do something > special. In my proposal, there is no URI problem; there is only a UI > problem. > > If we force MSRP chat to deal with multiple nicks, with or without explicit > scope, then we fix the problem in the beginning. I like that, but we had a > lot of push back on that idea. > > If MSRP chat clients don't have to do that from the get-go, then I see a > couple of alternatives: > 1. The server, when it supports the generalized mechanism, can provide a > unique nick "fred(2)" when it supplies the roster to the simple client. > 2. The server can determine if all parties support the generalized > mechanism, and only allow duplicate nicknames if they all can handle it. > > The former seems to work, the latter probably doesn't because if the order > of appearance in the chat was: > Smart Client, nick=fred > Smart Client, nick=fred > Simple Client, nick=george > > Then the server would initially allow fred to be duplicated, but would have > to rescind the permission when the dumb client showed up. > > Neither solution requires scope to be declared for the simple client. I > don't see how making scope explicit now helps the problem. We can have > scope be implicitly the domain of the server (e.g. the domain of the > conference URI). It could, by policy, further restrict to scope of the > chat. That may help the generalized mechanism a little (default domain when > none is supplied). It doesn't seem to help the simple client. Either it can > handle the UI for duplicate nicks now or it can't ever. > > Brian > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 4:26 PM > > To: Brian Rosen > > Cc: 'Geir Arne Sandbakken'; 'Hisham Khartabil'; simple@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope > > > > Brian, > > > > My concern is that what is done for simple be upward compatible with > > what is done for xcon. Simple may restrict the domain of uniqueness of > > the nickname to whatever scope the focus wants it to be. That won't > > result in any ambiguity as long as the conference really operates under > > the simple rules. > > > > But xcon will hopefully allow nicknames defined in different scopes. > > Thus there could be two users in an xcon conference with nicknames that > > are the same except for being defined in different scopes. How will that > > be rendered to a user that only understands the simple rules? It will > > simply see two users with the same nickname. > > > > To avoid that eventuality I think simple rules must recognize that > > nicknames have a scope, even if you can't request a particularly scoped > > nickname. And the UIs must be prepared to do something sensible in that > > case. > > > > Paul > > > > Brian Rosen wrote: > > > Yeah, this is getting somewhat more confusing instead of less confusing > > to > > > me. > > > > > > One of the purposes of a nickname asserted is linked with the notion of > > > anonymity. If we allowed nick@domain, we have an anonymous URI. There > > is a > > > problem here however; the conference event package would yield the real > > AoR > > > unless that was an anonymous URI. So it would seem that using a nick > > for an > > > anonymous URI is not sufficient; the conference event package would have > > to > > > be changed or the URI in the roster would have to be an anonymous URI. > > I > > > think the latter is the best answer. > > > > > > There is a need to define the scope of uniqueness for a nickname. We > > all > > > agree on that point. The text of the draft suggests that since the > > nickname > > > is unique in the domain, nick@domain is unique, and proposes to make a > > URI > > > out of that. I think this is too confusing, and we should just drop the > > > entire notion of creating a URI out of the nick; just use whatever is in > > the > > > conference roster. > > > > > > We're still left with defining the scope for which the nick is unique. > > This > > > came up before. The generalized mechanism makes the domain explicit, > > the > > > idea for MSRP chat was to make the domain something really simple. The > > > simplest is the domain of the chat. The largest it could be is the > > domain > > > of the server. Remember that although it's possible that a chat uri is > > > chat@chatid.example.com, it could also be chatid@example.com. You can't > > use > > > the domain of the focus as the domain of the chat. The simplest > > mechanism > > > to define for MSRP chat is that the nick is unique within the domain of > > the > > > conference (chat) URI. That would be the conference for the former > > example, > > > and the server for the latter example. If that bothers you too much, > > > uniqueness to the chat itself is fine with me. > > > > > > So a concrete proposal: > > > 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use the > > URI > > > in the roster. > > > 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the chat > > > itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more > > > stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants > > to. > > > The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. > > > > > > Brian > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > > >> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:47 AM > > >> To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil > > >> Cc: simple@ietf.org > > >> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > >> > > >> I thought I had explicitly argued against the nickname being a URI, and > > >> that having such a nickname URI routable and changeable during the > > >> conference will seriously break things. > > >> > > >> What I do have argued for is that the nickname string used for display > > >> purposes and easy reference to participants - needs to be associated to > > >> a scope. The purpose of the scope is to have the nickname string > > unique > > >> inside of it. IMHO the uniqueness aspect is what differentiates > > display > > >> names and nicknames. > > >> > > >> The scope is currently proposed to be a URI, but the nickname string > > >> itself is *not* part of it. We have two pieces of information; the > > >> nickname string and the nickname scope URI. This allows for unique > > >> nickname strings inside the scope of a conference URI (chatroom) like > > >> chat34@example.org. Having a nickname scope URI will also support > > >> scoping inside of domains or IP addresses - whatever you can represent > > >> as a URI. > > >> > > >> What we are constructing is something new. It's not a display name, it > > >> is not a SIP AOR, and not a routable SIP URI pretending to be a > > >> nickname. We have a nickname string which is unique inside a scope. > > >> > > >> Geir Arne > > >> > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > >>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] > > >>> > > >>> You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an > > >> address. > > >>> We don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general > > >> use > > >>> cases harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a > > >> nickname. > > >>> They are distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the > > >> nickname > for the UI. > > >>> There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly > > >>> represent the same user in the chat. > > >>> > > >>> The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. > > >>> The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. > > >>> > > >>> Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, > > >> you > > >>> can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a > > >> URI > > >>> to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client > > >> has > > >>> to > > >>> know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the > > >>> nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed > > >> nick@domain as > > >>> an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't > > >>> restrict > > >>> addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes > > >>> everything > > >>> more complex. > > >>> > > >>> We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the > > >> user > > >>> part of a URI. Just don't do that. > > >>> > > >>> A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some > > >>> forms > > >>> of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but > > >> I > > >>> don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer > > >> to > > >>> a > > >>> display name than a user part. > > >>> > > >>> Brian > > >>> > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > >>>> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > > >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM > > >>>> To: Hisham Khartabil > > >>>> Cc: simple@ietf.org > > >>>> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > >>>> > > >>>> Comments inline. > > >>>> > > >>>>>> [snip snip] > > >>>>>> render the domain part of it to make it so. > > >>>>> I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of > > >> 2 > > >>>>> participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the > > >>>>> application to distinguish them for the user. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the > > >> chatroom > > >>>>> service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. > > >>>> Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to > > >> be > > >>>> inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason > > >> for > > >>>> this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the > > >> clients > > >>>> acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. > > >>>> Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside > > >> a > > >>>> domain complicates the implementation of the server. > > >>>> > > >>>>>> That would probably violate > > >>>>>> what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering > > >>>> mechanisms > > >>>>>> has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). > > >>>>> Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the > > >> application? I > > >>>>> think not. > > >>>> I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested > > >> method > > >>>> to avoid having to render a nickname like this: > > >>>> nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com > > >>>> > > >>>>> [snip snip] > > >>>>> > > >>>>> This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of > > >> the > > >>>>>> winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the > > >>>>>> beertasters-chat@example.org. > > >>>>> Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been > > >> a > > >>>>> while though). There were a few people against what you just > > >> proposed > > >>>>> due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both > > >>>>> chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. > > >>>> The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the > > >> UI > > >>>> would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a > > >>>> domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? > > >>>> > > >>>> Geir Arne > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> _______________________________________________ > > >>>> Simple mailing list > > >>>> Simple@ietf.org > > >>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Simple mailing list > > > Simple@ietf.org > > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 15 19:35:31 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEwFd-0003CB-GY; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:29 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JEwFb-0003Bl-Cd for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:27 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEwFb-0003Bd-2m for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:27 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEwFZ-0001tZ-Oa for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:27 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,290,1196658000"; d="scan'208";a="83452754" Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Jan 2008 19:35:26 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0G0ZPeC011108; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:25 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0G0YrNM018023; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:35:12 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:05 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.133] ([161.44.174.133]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:04 -0500 Message-ID: <478D5138.5020600@cisco.com> Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 19:35:04 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brian Rosen Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope References: <00cd01c85701$f394d3e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268D03@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <478D24ED.7030003@cisco.com> <026401c857ce$8fb459e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> In-Reply-To: <026401c857ce$8fb459e0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 00:35:04.0597 (UTC) FILETIME=[A3190450:01C857D7] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=12823; t=1200443725; x=1201307725; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Nickname=20scope |Sender:=20 |To:=20Brian=20Rosen=20; bh=CMx0QHxDVLAGYjj6to/dKYFjY3qzwZRd6VVxPMd7DIU=; b=TDXMZFvaEeveX8oYXwZy/BnYjgbb0MG7m2TIBINeadXGEyeTigJjXQcg6H m1Csg/gAAQnFtf+yF42HsJhoONjt3ouUT1mEvyENykOxG7xcABGWKW/BQ3qg M39B9XcDLM; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: fcb459c204557d9509ce9c1b55d771f1 Cc: 'Geir Arne Sandbakken' , simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Brian Rosen wrote: > The problem isn't recognizing scope, the problem is the UI when the nick is > the same, but the scope (domain) is different. Right. > Then UI has to do something > special. In my proposal, there is no URI problem; there is only a UI > problem. > > If we force MSRP chat to deal with multiple nicks, with or without explicit > scope, then we fix the problem in the beginning. I like that, but we had a > lot of push back on that idea. I like it too. There needs to be a final decision on that. > If MSRP chat clients don't have to do that from the get-go, then I see a > couple of alternatives: > 1. The server, when it supports the generalized mechanism, can provide a > unique nick "fred(2)" when it supplies the roster to the simple client. > 2. The server can determine if all parties support the generalized > mechanism, and only allow duplicate nicknames if they all can handle it. Yep, I agree. > The former seems to work, Yes, that had occurred to me as well. It is a way out. > the latter probably doesn't because if the order > of appearance in the chat was: > Smart Client, nick=fred > Smart Client, nick=fred > Simple Client, nick=george Yes. We had this discussion once before and that came up. It is unworkable. > Then the server would initially allow fred to be duplicated, but would have > to rescind the permission when the dumb client showed up. Rescinding is unworkable IMO. > Neither solution requires scope to be declared for the simple client. I > don't see how making scope explicit now helps the problem. Making the scope explicit means the problem of disambiguating semi-duplicate nicknames is left to the clients, who can then do it in a way that suits them. Leaving it to the server means that *it* determines how a duplicate nickname is modified to disambiguate it. Some may like that, some may not. It has the potential to be confusing if I refer to my own nickname explicitly and others see me as having a variant of it. > We can have > scope be implicitly the domain of the server (e.g. the domain of the > conference URI). It could, by policy, further restrict to scope of the > chat. That may help the generalized mechanism a little (default domain when > none is supplied). It doesn't seem to help the simple client. Either it can > handle the UI for duplicate nicks now or it can't ever. In the interest of making progress perhaps it is ok to assume your alternative 1. I think this means that for simple chat participants it will have to modify nicknames from other domains so that they are distinct from any nickname in its own domain that could possibly join the conference. How it does that is its business. It can affix "(n)" where the (n) identifies another domain, or it can affix "@", or whatever it wants to do. Paul > Brian > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 4:26 PM >> To: Brian Rosen >> Cc: 'Geir Arne Sandbakken'; 'Hisham Khartabil'; simple@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope >> >> Brian, >> >> My concern is that what is done for simple be upward compatible with >> what is done for xcon. Simple may restrict the domain of uniqueness of >> the nickname to whatever scope the focus wants it to be. That won't >> result in any ambiguity as long as the conference really operates under >> the simple rules. >> >> But xcon will hopefully allow nicknames defined in different scopes. >> Thus there could be two users in an xcon conference with nicknames that >> are the same except for being defined in different scopes. How will that >> be rendered to a user that only understands the simple rules? It will >> simply see two users with the same nickname. >> >> To avoid that eventuality I think simple rules must recognize that >> nicknames have a scope, even if you can't request a particularly scoped >> nickname. And the UIs must be prepared to do something sensible in that >> case. >> >> Paul >> >> Brian Rosen wrote: >>> Yeah, this is getting somewhat more confusing instead of less confusing >> to >>> me. >>> >>> One of the purposes of a nickname asserted is linked with the notion of >>> anonymity. If we allowed nick@domain, we have an anonymous URI. There >> is a >>> problem here however; the conference event package would yield the real >> AoR >>> unless that was an anonymous URI. So it would seem that using a nick >> for an >>> anonymous URI is not sufficient; the conference event package would have >> to >>> be changed or the URI in the roster would have to be an anonymous URI. >> I >>> think the latter is the best answer. >>> >>> There is a need to define the scope of uniqueness for a nickname. We >> all >>> agree on that point. The text of the draft suggests that since the >> nickname >>> is unique in the domain, nick@domain is unique, and proposes to make a >> URI >>> out of that. I think this is too confusing, and we should just drop the >>> entire notion of creating a URI out of the nick; just use whatever is in >> the >>> conference roster. >>> >>> We're still left with defining the scope for which the nick is unique. >> This >>> came up before. The generalized mechanism makes the domain explicit, >> the >>> idea for MSRP chat was to make the domain something really simple. The >>> simplest is the domain of the chat. The largest it could be is the >> domain >>> of the server. Remember that although it's possible that a chat uri is >>> chat@chatid.example.com, it could also be chatid@example.com. You can't >> use >>> the domain of the focus as the domain of the chat. The simplest >> mechanism >>> to define for MSRP chat is that the nick is unique within the domain of >> the >>> conference (chat) URI. That would be the conference for the former >> example, >>> and the server for the latter example. If that bothers you too much, >>> uniqueness to the chat itself is fine with me. >>> >>> So a concrete proposal: >>> 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use the >> URI >>> in the roster. >>> 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the chat >>> itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more >>> stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants >> to. >>> The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. >>> >>> Brian >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 6:47 AM >>>> To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil >>>> Cc: simple@ietf.org >>>> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope >>>> >>>> I thought I had explicitly argued against the nickname being a URI, and >>>> that having such a nickname URI routable and changeable during the >>>> conference will seriously break things. >>>> >>>> What I do have argued for is that the nickname string used for display >>>> purposes and easy reference to participants - needs to be associated to >>>> a scope. The purpose of the scope is to have the nickname string >> unique >>>> inside of it. IMHO the uniqueness aspect is what differentiates >> display >>>> names and nicknames. >>>> >>>> The scope is currently proposed to be a URI, but the nickname string >>>> itself is *not* part of it. We have two pieces of information; the >>>> nickname string and the nickname scope URI. This allows for unique >>>> nickname strings inside the scope of a conference URI (chatroom) like >>>> chat34@example.org. Having a nickname scope URI will also support >>>> scoping inside of domains or IP addresses - whatever you can represent >>>> as a URI. >>>> >>>> What we are constructing is something new. It's not a display name, it >>>> is not a SIP AOR, and not a routable SIP URI pretending to be a >>>> nickname. We have a nickname string which is unique inside a scope. >>>> >>>> Geir Arne >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >>>>> >>>>> You seem to insist that the nickname HAS to be used to form an >>>> address. >>>>> We don't need that to be true, and I argue that it makes more general >>>> use >>>>> cases harder for no advantage. You have a URI and you have a >>>> nickname. >>>>> They are distinct. You use the URI for addressing. You use the >>>> nickname > for the UI. >>>>> There doesn't need to be ANY relationship other than they explicitly >>>>> represent the same user in the chat. >>>>> >>>>> The URI is just a URI; it doesn't matter what the user part is. >>>>> The nickname is just a name. It's not used for addressing. >>>>> >>>>> Normally, your AoR is the address used. If you want to be anonymous, >>>> you >>>>> can use an anonymous URI to join the chat, or the focus can give you a >>>> URI >>>>> to use. It's up to it to make the URI unique. That's all the client >>>> has >>>>> to >>>>> know. There is no need to create another URI for addressing using the >>>>> nickname. That's just unneeded complexity. If you allowed >>>> nick@domain as >>>>> an address, you ALSO have to allow an AoR as an address. You can't >>>>> restrict >>>>> addressing to nick@domain. Therefore, allowing nick@domain makes >>>>> everything >>>>> more complex. >>>>> >>>>> We get confused when you try to force the nickname to be used as the >>>> user >>>>> part of a URI. Just don't do that. >>>>> >>>>> A nickname is a string. It's used in a UI. We can have rules in some >>>>> forms >>>>> of nick use that have various uniqueness requirements if you want, but >>>> I >>>>> don't want to see a nick used as part of an address. It's much closer >>>> to >>>>> a >>>>> display name than a user part. >>>>> >>>>> Brian >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 6:59 AM >>>>>> To: Hisham Khartabil >>>>>> Cc: simple@ietf.org >>>>>> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope >>>>>> >>>>>> Comments inline. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> [snip snip] >>>>>>>> render the domain part of it to make it so. >>>>>>> I am suggesting that it should be unique. I don't like the idea of >>>> 2 >>>>>>> participants having the same nickname and leaving it to the >>>>>>> application to distinguish them for the user. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The domain can certainly help in making it unique, and the >>>> chatroom >>>>>>> service itself needs to make sure that they are unique. >>>>>> Think we agree here, but I want to extend the scope of uniqueness to >>>> be >>>>>> inside the scope of an URI - and not only a domain. The main reason >>>> for >>>>>> this is to support simple ad-hoc chat sessions where one of the >>>> clients >>>>>> acts as the server provisioning nicknames for the conference URI. >>>>>> Requiring the client to have support for validating nicknames inside >>>> a >>>>>> domain complicates the implementation of the server. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> That would probably violate >>>>>>>> what most think of simple nicknames, and different rendering >>>>>> mechanisms >>>>>>>> has been proposed - like nicky(1) and nicky(2). >>>>>>> Do we want to standardise how the render is done by the >>>> application? I >>>>>>> think not. >>>>>> I'm not trying to standardize rendering, but refer to a suggested >>>> method >>>>>> to avoid having to render a nickname like this: >>>>>> nicky@nicknameservice.shortOfShortDomainNames.com >>>>>> >>>>>>> [snip snip] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This provides the possibility to have a nickname "president" of >>>> the >>>>>>>> winetasters-chat@example.org, and a nickname "president" of the >>>>>>>> beertasters-chat@example.org. >>>>>>> Well, that's not how how I recall chat services work (it has been >>>> a >>>>>>> while though). There were a few people against what you just >>>> proposed >>>>>>> due to the fact that it will create confusion for people in both >>>>>>> chatrooms who just see "president" displayed. >>>>>> The plan was to always have scope associated to nicknames, and the >>>> UI >>>>>> would have to relate to it. Then there is no difference between a >>>>>> domain scope and a room scope. When there is scope - is there hope? >>>>>> >>>>>> Geir Arne >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Simple mailing list >>>>>> Simple@ietf.org >>>>>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Simple mailing list >>> Simple@ietf.org >>> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple >>> > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From GladyswilshireEscobar@logcabin.org Tue Jan 15 22:18:23 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEynH-0004Yj-NE; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:18:23 -0500 Received: from pool-71-175-29-28.phlapa.fios.verizon.net ([71.175.29.28] helo=d63lck21.home) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JEynH-0005VR-Cb; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:18:23 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host90476598.logcabin.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id 7EjABwlA29.550164.vqD.Uq6.1373516326663 for ; Tue, 15 Jan 2008 22:18:19 +0500 Message-ID: <59b3701c857ee$78cfdae0$0201a8c0@D63LCK21> From: "Kim Corbett" To: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_59B33_01C857EE.78CFDAE0-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 06:02:01 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF61r-0001fZ-LE; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:01:55 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JF61r-0001fU-3r for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:01:55 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF61q-0001fM-PE for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:01:54 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF61q-0006j6-7l for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 06:01:54 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0GB1lcE007944; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:01:47 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:01:47 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:00:53 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268FA9@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchRetYygnWFMDuSQ96jhMhXTXOxVgAa46sgAUaDSgAAFdn+gAAS//GAACEfNiA= From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Hisham Khartabil" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 11:01:47.0096 (UTC) FILETIME=[2FEF0580:01C8582F] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Brian, > [snip snip] > So a concrete proposal: > 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use the > URI in the roster. I have done this for the upcoming version of the draft. The Nickname itself is just a string, and there are no rules for making a routable address from it. =20 > 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the chat > itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more > stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants to. > The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. Currently the upcoming draft has the nickname scope called "Nickname Scope URI" (lack of a better wording) - and it's a URI that can be the chat URI itself. Requiring a scope from the start will force the clients to cope with equal nickname strings. The reasons for not limiting the uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI is to cope with having multiple chat rooms (conference instances) in the same domain. This would disallow users to have the same nickname string in different chat rooms, and you can not easily select a unique nickname in a chat room based on feedback the user gets from the conference package. Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 08:28:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8JJ-0000pj-Hq; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:28:05 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8JI-0000pe-QZ for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:28:04 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8JI-0000pW-GG for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:28:04 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8JG-0005OG-3U for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:28:04 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0GDRrgv003194; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:27:53 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:26:52 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 14:25:58 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01269069@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <478D5138.5020600@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchX17x+1+A9QcDIQFio+/bEKxGHUQAZ6g7Q From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Paul Kyzivat" , "Brian Rosen" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 13:26:52.0442 (UTC) FILETIME=[74B967A0:01C85843] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > > Making the scope explicit means the problem of disambiguating > semi-duplicate nicknames is left to the clients, who can then do it in a > way that suits them. Unfortunately relying on the clients to do the disambiguating will lead to problems. Often nicknames are referred to inside the chat itself, and if two clients rendered the nickname differently they would be referred to differently. The chat could become a bit chaotic. Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 08:58:40 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8ms-0007yJ-Sr; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:38 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8mr-0007vb-AG for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:37 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8mq-0007uI-VC for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:37 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF8mq-0002du-M8 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:36 -0500 Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Jan 2008 08:58:36 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0GDwaOi021880; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:36 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0GDwBNi020509; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:58:36 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:31 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.133] ([161.44.174.133]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:30 -0500 Message-ID: <478E0D89.3060400@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:58:33 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geir Arne Sandbakken Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01269069@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01269069@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 13:58:30.0821 (UTC) FILETIME=[E03F0D50:01C85847] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=836; t=1200491916; x=1201355916; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Nickname=20scope |Sender:=20 |To:=20Geir=20Arne=20Sandbakken=20; bh=kOfvlC6tQvS1ngp25rSU0vpgZ/4evH++vuBHCHUcUgQ=; b=QDbrkBJvtwp0Mxe3M78phvLNtwUfbbv+m1Y8m9n7lmYd49liyYskFPiGV3 AzGgvb8erlrYHDD0319I/NZLC0eBR2t+BuTi9/gIOC84F6x3SCIPZV7LLF+h 6OiAe1KepB; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >> >> Making the scope explicit means the problem of disambiguating >> semi-duplicate nicknames is left to the clients, who can then do it in > a >> way that suits them. > > Unfortunately relying on the clients to do the disambiguating will lead > to problems. Often nicknames are referred to inside the chat itself, > and if two clients rendered the nickname differently they would be > referred to differently. The chat could become a bit chaotic. Did you note that I bought into Brian's suggestion that the focus be responsible for the disambiguation of the conflicting nicknames? But that does still present a problem, because the participant won't know if his own nickname has been modified to make it unambiguous. Paul _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 09:12:32 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF908-0008EH-TZ; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:12:20 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JF907-000854-C9 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:12:19 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF906-000815-Uv for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:12:19 -0500 Received: from ebru.winwebhosting.com ([74.54.111.226]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF906-0004Eo-DC for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:12:18 -0500 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSLT41xp) by ebru.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JF90Y-00009e-Dw; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:12:46 -0600 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Geir Arne Sandbakken'" , "'Hisham Khartabil'" References: <021a01c857a8$23c31990$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268FA9@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:12:13 -0500 Message-ID: <033901c85849$ccae96f0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB01268FA9@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: AchRetYygnWFMDuSQ96jhMhXTXOxVgAa46sgAUaDSgAAFdn+gAAS//GAACEfNiAABhOLAA== X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ebru.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 082a9cbf4d599f360ac7f815372a6a15 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Hmmm, if clients have to deal with two nicknames that are the same, with different scope, then there is no UI problem; all clients have to do that themselves. We also have to think about the generalized mechanism. There too we must have explicit scope. Is everyone comfortable that the scope is a URI and not a domain? So for the generalized mechanism we might propose a new header: INVITE chat32@chats.example.com To: Chat32@chats.example.com From: ronnie.butler@mydomain.com Nickname: "Ronnie", "verifier@mydomain.com" Which means that the UAC is asserting that it has been assigned the nickname Ronnie for its AoR ronnie.butler@mydomain.com verifiable by an entity at verifier@mydomain.com. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 6:01 AM > To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil > Cc: simple@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > Brian, > > > [snip snip] > > So a concrete proposal: > > 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use > the > > URI in the roster. > > I have done this for the upcoming version of the draft. The Nickname > itself is just a string, and there are no rules for making a routable > address from it. > > > 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the > chat > > itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more > > stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants > to. > > The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. > > Currently the upcoming draft has the nickname scope called "Nickname > Scope URI" (lack of a better wording) - and it's a URI that can be the > chat URI itself. Requiring a scope from the start will force the > clients to cope with equal nickname strings. > > The reasons for not limiting the uniqueness to the domain of the chat > URI is to cope with having multiple chat rooms (conference instances) in > the same domain. This would disallow users to have the same nickname > string in different chat rooms, and you can not easily select a unique > nickname in a chat room based on feedback the user gets from the > conference package. > > Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 09:32:07 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9J0-0005lo-QJ; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:31:50 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9Iz-0005lM-CR for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:31:49 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9Iz-0005lE-25 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:31:49 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9Iy-0004l0-Fj for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:31:48 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0GEVYcn017400; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:31:35 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:18:16 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:17:22 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0126909C@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <478E0D89.3060400@cisco.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchYR/M/b+Xq+aCBRa263Do132fiYgAAAB6w From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Paul Kyzivat" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 14:18:16.0481 (UTC) FILETIME=[A2F46910:01C8584A] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Comments inline. > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] >=20 > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > >> From: Paul Kyzivat [mailto:pkyzivat@cisco.com] > >> > >> Making the scope explicit means the problem of disambiguating > >> semi-duplicate nicknames is left to the clients, who can then do it in > > a > >> way that suits them. > > > > Unfortunately relying on the clients to do the disambiguating will lead > > to problems. Often nicknames are referred to inside the chat itself, > > and if two clients rendered the nickname differently they would be > > referred to differently. The chat could become a bit chaotic. >=20 > Did you note that I bought into Brian's suggestion that the focus be > responsible for the disambiguation of the conflicting nicknames? Yes, but there is a catch doing this. Having the simple client view the nicknames differently than the smart client - would lead to the exact same problem as having the clients do the disambiguating themselves. > But that does still present a problem, because the participant won't > know if his own nickname has been modified to make it unambiguous. I guess it could be returned in a 200 response to the NICKNAME method, but I'm not sure I like that. Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 09:51:20 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9bn-0007nm-EM; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:51:15 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9bm-0007ng-Aq for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:51:14 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9bm-0007nY-1A for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:51:14 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JF9bl-0008GW-E0 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:51:13 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0GEp3QP023151; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:51:03 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:50:19 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:49:25 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB012690C9@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <033901c85849$ccae96f0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Nickname scope Thread-Index: AchRetYygnWFMDuSQ96jhMhXTXOxVgAa46sgAUaDSgAAFdn+gAAS//GAACEfNiAABhOLAAACsemw From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Brian Rosen" , "Hisham Khartabil" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 14:50:19.0412 (UTC) FILETIME=[1D1C6540:01C8584F] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 73734d43604d52d23b3eba644a169745 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Comments inline. > Hmmm, if clients have to deal with two nicknames that are the same, with > different scope, then there is no UI problem; all clients have to do that > themselves. > > We also have to think about the generalized mechanism. There too we must > have explicit scope. Is everyone comfortable that the scope is a URI and > not a domain? Realizing that scope would always have to be rendered in the UI to avoid misunderstandings for references inside the chat itself - it's very debatable. =20 A quick optimization could be that if the scope URI is the same as the conference URI, the client might skip rendering it. Then only the generalized nicknames would have its scope rendered - which actually could make sense.=20 > So for the generalized mechanism we might propose a new header: >=20 > INVITE chat32@chats.example.com > To: Chat32@chats.example.com > From: ronnie.butler@mydomain.com > Nickname: "Ronnie", "verifier@mydomain.com" >=20 > Which means that the UAC is asserting that it has been assigned the > nickname Ronnie for its AoR ronnie.butler@mydomain.com verifiable=20 > by an entity at verifier@mydomain.com. I like this.=20 Geir Arne > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 6:01 AM > > To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil > > Cc: simple@ietf.org > > Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope > > > > Brian, > > > > > [snip snip] > > > So a concrete proposal: > > > 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just use > > the > > > URI in the roster. > > > > I have done this for the upcoming version of the draft. The Nickname > > itself is just a string, and there are no rules for making a routable > > address from it. > > > > > 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the > > chat > > > itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a more > > > stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it wants > > to. > > > The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. > > > > Currently the upcoming draft has the nickname scope called "Nickname > > Scope URI" (lack of a better wording) - and it's a URI that can be the > > chat URI itself. Requiring a scope from the start will force the > > clients to cope with equal nickname strings. > > > > The reasons for not limiting the uniqueness to the domain of the chat > > URI is to cope with having multiple chat rooms (conference instances) in > > the same domain. This would disallow users to have the same nickname > > string in different chat rooms, and you can not easily select a unique > > nickname in a chat room based on feedback the user gets from the > > conference package. > > > > Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 12:42:21 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFCHF-0004lM-1r; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:42:13 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JFCHD-0004hU-4I for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:42:11 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFCHC-0004dy-K0 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:42:10 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFCHC-0003Vh-0s for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:42:10 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.24,295,1196658000"; d="scan'208";a="83540173" Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Jan 2008 12:42:00 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0GHfx4L006984; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:41:59 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0GHfgNK018847; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:41:59 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:41:48 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.133] ([161.44.174.133]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:41:48 -0500 Message-ID: <478E41E0.8070404@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:41:52 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geir Arne Sandbakken Subject: Re: [Simple] Nickname scope References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB012690C9@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB012690C9@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Jan 2008 17:41:48.0106 (UTC) FILETIME=[11A682A0:01C85867] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=3692; t=1200505319; x=1201369319; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20Nickname=20scope |Sender:=20 |To:=20Geir=20Arne=20Sandbakken=20; bh=Ld81n3kzi5cOLni2HKlS/uzyluEzW71feL++Kw7fZm4=; b=avYMvb9Ri7G7PfyaSHFTmeEgflLfNB2rylhpAZemfqMUSLaqqiEmss60Q7 NIcC/X+Y8G1dayrohImRIKU5hCQh+dmMG2ZUUiOdTZgvtdnHhXPkJmJk5yAs mUfuLCJUSL; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 6d95a152022472c7d6cdf886a0424dc6 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > Comments inline. > >> Hmmm, if clients have to deal with two nicknames that are the same, > with >> different scope, then there is no UI problem; all clients have to do > that >> themselves. >> >> We also have to think about the generalized mechanism. There too we > must >> have explicit scope. Is everyone comfortable that the scope is a URI > and >> not a domain? > > Realizing that scope would always have to be rendered in the UI to avoid > misunderstandings for references inside the chat itself - it's very > debatable. > > A quick optimization could be that if the scope URI is the same as the > conference URI, the client might skip rendering it. Then only the > generalized nicknames would have its scope rendered - which actually > could make sense. Leaving the decision about how to render this to the UA is not bad IMO, as long as we make it clear that the UA must do it. There are many ways it might be done, and we need not decide. The UA could render the first usage of the nickname that it observes with the actual nickname. And then when it sees a differently scoped version of the same nickname it could present it suffixed with "(2)" or "@domain" if the scope is just a domain, or it could present each different one in a new color, or ... >> So for the generalized mechanism we might propose a new header: >> >> INVITE chat32@chats.example.com >> To: Chat32@chats.example.com >> From: ronnie.butler@mydomain.com >> Nickname: "Ronnie", "verifier@mydomain.com" >> >> Which means that the UAC is asserting that it has been assigned the >> nickname Ronnie for its AoR ronnie.butler@mydomain.com verifiable >> by an entity at verifier@mydomain.com. > > I like this. Yeah, I like it too. (Now if we just had a verifier protocol to go with it.) Paul > Geir Arne > >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Geir Arne Sandbakken [mailto:geir.sandbakken@tandberg.com] >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 6:01 AM >>> To: Brian Rosen; Hisham Khartabil >>> Cc: simple@ietf.org >>> Subject: RE: [Simple] Nickname scope >>> >>> Brian, >>> >>>> [snip snip] >>>> So a concrete proposal: >>>> 1. Delete all references to creating a URI from a nickname. Just > use >>> the >>>> URI in the roster. >>> I have done this for the upcoming version of the draft. The Nickname >>> itself is just a string, and there are no rules for making a > routable >>> address from it. >>> >>>> 2. Define the scope of uniqueness for MSRP chat to be at least the >>> chat >>>> itself, with the possibility that the chat server can permit a > more >>>> stringent (e.g. uniqueness to the domain of the chat URI) if it > wants >>> to. >>>> The clients can't assume anything beyond uniqueness to a chat. >>> Currently the upcoming draft has the nickname scope called "Nickname >>> Scope URI" (lack of a better wording) - and it's a URI that can be > the >>> chat URI itself. Requiring a scope from the start will force the >>> clients to cope with equal nickname strings. >>> >>> The reasons for not limiting the uniqueness to the domain of the > chat >>> URI is to cope with having multiple chat rooms (conference > instances) in >>> the same domain. This would disallow users to have the same > nickname >>> string in different chat rooms, and you can not easily select a > unique >>> nickname in a chat room based on feedback the user gets from the >>> conference package. >>> >>> Geir Arne > > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From HoraciovietFranks@chilkatsoft.com Wed Jan 16 13:46:18 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFDHG-0006O8-5g; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:46:18 -0500 Received: from host86-137-48-123.range86-137.btcentralplus.com ([86.137.48.123] helo=darkthunderapc.home) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFDHF-0004zz-K5; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:46:18 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Mohamed Sosa" To: Cc: , =20
Your your credit = report doesn't=20 matter to us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 need IMMEDIATE ready money to spend ANY way you like or need Extra money = to=20 give the company a boost or want A low interest loan - NO STRINGS = ATTACHED,=20 here is best deal we can offer you NOW (hurry, this deal will expire=20 TONIGHT):
=20
 
$23,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when the deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply finish this easy form...
=20
 
Don't worry about = approval, your=20 credit score will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://thetworld.com.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_EB62_01C8586F.EB61ABC0-- From InezextemporeWillard@booksmith.com Wed Jan 16 16:54:31 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFGDP-0004ua-Ei; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:54:31 -0500 Received: from [222.131.155.5] (helo=dell03.euchinawto.org) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFGDO-0002dW-VL; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:54:31 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host53430160.booksmith.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id d71KadD268.626267.wga.R7x.7957397586461 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 05:55:16 -0800 Message-ID: <86dc601c8588a$86bd6770$7e19a8c0@DELL03> From: "Alberta Mckinley" To: Cc: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_86DC2_01C8588A.86BD6770-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 17:50:09 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFH56-0000nk-IA; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:50:00 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JFH54-0000nZ-SD for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:49:58 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFH54-0000nQ-52 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:49:58 -0500 Received: from dizzyd.com ([207.210.219.225]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFH53-0004Vx-L7 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:49:58 -0500 Received: from wrk225.corp.jabber.com (dencfw1.jabber.com [207.182.164.5]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by dizzyd.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF11404A0 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:49:56 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <478E8A13.5080502@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:49:55 -0700 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0e9ebc0cbd700a87c0637ad0e2c91610 Subject: [Simple] [Fwd: I-D Action:draft-saintandre-xmpp-presence-analysis-03.txt] X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1170515783==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --===============1170515783== Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms080001060704090002010209" This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms080001060704090002010209 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FYI. -------- Original Message -------- To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:40:01 -0500 Subject: I-D Action:draft-saintandre-xmpp-presence-analysis-03.txt A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Interdomain Presence Scaling Analysis for the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) Author(s) : P. Saint-Andre Filename : draft-saintandre-xmpp-presence-analysis-03.txt Pages : 17 Date : 2008-01-16 This document analyzes the network impact of presence sharing between domains that federate using the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-xmpp-presence-analysis-03.txt --------------ms080001060704090002010209 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYQDCC B3AwggbZoAMCAQICAQowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQAwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQI EwZJc3JhZWwxDjAMBgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYD VQQLExFDQSBBdXRob3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlv biBBdXRob3JpdHkxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAeFw0wNTA0 MDUxNDUyMTNaFw0xMDA0MDQxNDUyMTNaMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNy YWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNh dGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZy ZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAPEaOcSx5ZNexwo1zJNcX48UV0UtkNtWX3qa9ZaX2VZilgIz eIrObloQV0Ma2rdgqosW9xMb5u3lBVIumt7fEwgMqqtDa3F2Qudelv93P9z2nbmn7X4GnCKA IQcW97KOSgQQHaVPHq03xGFbszx+LOKrBi/xv3bcGxtYrH+10M1nHbCRo8U2+zcJQowxoI+O U5nhko9vU25Jp8ZQ2fROH6C2TSjZuanzMTyvc5+dJiN2Hm2MhAMrqO7pUGhDKuUvnmKpAcwj eYQHU51mvlB4IId+4bTEwVoG4AMJ8RXB47VdJevN0yqeJSACyoRft4w4OpqFysR1HTT6aE6u xLg9ZC0CAwEAAaOCBBMwggQPMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wCwYDVR0PBAQDAgHmMB0GA1Ud DgQWBBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZCDCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQcicOWzL3+MtUNjIEx tpidjShkjaGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UE BxMFRWlsYXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0 eSBEZXAuMSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8G CSqGSIb3DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEAMB0GA1UdEQQWMBSBEmFkbWluQHN0 YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAdBgNVHRIEFjAUgRJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwYgYDVR0fBFswWTAp oCegJYYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NhLWNybC5jcmwwLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6 Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NybC9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMIIBSgYDVR0gBIIBQTCCAT0wggE5 BgsrBgEEAYG1NwEBATCCASgwLwYIKwYBBQUHAgEWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y Zy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvaW50 ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCBvQYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgbAwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGX TGltaXRlZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25z KiBvZiB0aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkgUG9saWN5IGF2YWls YWJsZSBhdCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjARBglghkgBhvhC AQEEBAMCAAcwUAYJYIZIAYb4QgENBEMWQVN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUgRnJlZSBTU0wgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGVzMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBBAQlFiNo dHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY2EtY3JsLmNybDAzBglghkgBhvhCAQMEJhYkaHR0 cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NydC1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRw Oi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFAAOBgQBc1g6H yT3ZrGb0Kq+kkqetnSXtcwffHEr6Tia2XqCqPLLzdZ8VTxVjeq/Kpg2u+8cGASIl1U45XmWa v4Vez+jSSnChRHwidmbwjCtNBFxr4C/Nkgs8wk2zNQbh+zlDKNophJT7+DVOhnIMJzdNkQW0 4STurMCFwLoyx5k1rDHQYTCCCGIwggdKoAMCAQICAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBrzEL MAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEj MCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29t IENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBz dGFydGNvbS5vcmcwHhcNMDcwODIyMjExMzI3WhcNMDgwODIxMjExMzI3WjCBujELMAkGA1UE BhMCVVMxETAPBgNVBAgTCENvbG9yYWRvMQ8wDQYDVQQHEwZEZW52ZXIxGjAYBgNVBAoTEVBl dGVyIFNhaW50LUFuZHJlMSwwKgYDVQQLEyNTdGFydENvbSBUcnVzdGVkIENlcnRpZmljYXRl IE1lbWJlcjEaMBgGA1UEAxMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQtQW5kcmUxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEnN0 cGV0ZXJAc3RwZXRlci5pbTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBALC1dkqD gghuvUCkEloRDX50TTJ6Szj1BqtMpYq+An66BwkWfP07uay+jHori77776wk1/Ajk1nTSHX+ JWo+JWwVXYWBX+Zd780bB0FGShYlHGwMhd/pxX9sT4KW3D+r8sIHVbTGdudSweuNdBhqr1iE cjze75hpywMkk1OQhTkseQxI5owa9M31JOdNEX0Ja6esyhwwtqqTNC86OujXwa2wew8GTRJE 9p2I0B1VCsKuJaPatbIcf9OFiTSODb5vyoq3+lrElh6V6BXKxEfQ4D2HCSY+5UmlKdnltzvN bqxyaTYQi1YGsFzew7ST3R8P5jrCq2cvRjGrTKVojZXgPZ0CAwEAAaOCBHgwggR0MAwGA1Ud EwQFMAMCAQAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSwMB0GA1UdJQQWMBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAd BgNVHQ4EFgQUl7CU2dS/alOwLIHV/Oc2RkGDYugwgd0GA1UdIwSB1TCB0oAUBKzbJHdTRkaW XxcBXH1CR71IGQihgbakgbMwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQIEwZJc3JhZWwxDjAM BgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYDVQQLExFDQSBBdXRo b3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkx ITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZ4IBCjCCAUAGA1UdIASCATcwggEz MIIBLwYLKwYBBAGBtTcBAQQwggEeMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjAvBggrBgEFBQcCARYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgbMGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGmMBQWDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4wAwIB ARqBjUxpbWl0ZWQgTGlhYmlsaXR5LCByZWFkIHRoZSBzZWN0aW9uICpMZWdhbCBMaW1pdGF0 aW9ucyogb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gUG9saWN5IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBh dCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjBkBgNVHR8EXTBbMCygKqAo hiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDov L2NybC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDCBhAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEeDB2MDcGCCsG AQUFBzABhitodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViL2NsYXNzMy91c2VyL2NhMDsG CCsGAQUFBzAChi9odHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViLmNsYXNzMy51c2VyLmNh LmNydDARBglghkgBhvhCAQEEBAMCBaAwMQYJYIZIAYb4QgENBCQWIlN0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0 ZWQgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUwMgYJYIZIAYb4QgEEBCUWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMDUGCWCGSAGG+EIBAwQoFiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAyBglghkgBhvhCAQgEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3Jn MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQCdG1L0T4OT1x4X/cKsuHxgijRaZGGiVECcn5+1X7E3H54/ yDkUqWAp6MZ3hZm36pzTYYnl+5M6vldLcqFCVpD7MgH6Kmu+r6pXAjU33k1RIHnkBvQ6KGlR p0RjfaZW/2MkG07vF2QTLbx6KIhi0pa9Bg9wlqyw+C2g6FYnfmrdJLgGrxUXek8DSZNjZ/AA 75OoutrWkBtdaL2TbFiawdbGuJbSoQLHqLrNhT8f74Oec7ReOmuUTEL8hsFU0sbY/n2e9Wna 1Vzze3nZPbyPiC5F88p88gVLB9mKkOzleYefYiQw8LABz5x1MI+w0bNKNPLviJ/KnHGFEfVL z1oMHyC3MIIIYjCCB0qgAwIBAgIDAXiqMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJ TDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpT ZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQ cmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y ZzAeFw0wNzA4MjIyMTEzMjdaFw0wODA4MjEyMTEzMjdaMIG6MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzERMA8G A1UECBMIQ29sb3JhZG8xDzANBgNVBAcTBkRlbnZlcjEaMBgGA1UEChMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQt QW5kcmUxLDAqBgNVBAsTI1N0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0ZWQgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgTWVtYmVyMRow GAYDVQQDExFQZXRlciBTYWludC1BbmRyZTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3RwZXRlckBzdHBl dGVyLmltMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAsLV2SoOCCG69QKQSWhEN fnRNMnpLOPUGq0ylir4CfroHCRZ8/Tu5rL6MeiuLvvvvrCTX8COTWdNIdf4laj4lbBVdhYFf 5l3vzRsHQUZKFiUcbAyF3+nFf2xPgpbcP6vywgdVtMZ251LB6410GGqvWIRyPN7vmGnLAyST U5CFOSx5DEjmjBr0zfUk500RfQlrp6zKHDC2qpM0Lzo66NfBrbB7DwZNEkT2nYjQHVUKwq4l o9q1shx/04WJNI4Nvm/Kirf6WsSWHpXoFcrER9DgPYcJJj7lSaUp2eW3O81urHJpNhCLVgaw XN7DtJPdHw/mOsKrZy9GMatMpWiNleA9nQIDAQABo4IEeDCCBHQwDAYDVR0TBAUwAwIBADAL BgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSX sJTZ1L9qU7AsgdX85zZGQYNi6DCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZ CKGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UEBxMFRWls YXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0eSBEZXAu MSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3 DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEKMIIBQAYDVR0gBIIBNzCCATMwggEvBgsrBgEE AYG1NwEBBDCCAR4wNQYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKWh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9pbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUucGRmMC8GCCsGAQUFBwIBFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjCBswYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgaYwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGNTGltaXRl ZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25zKiBvZiB0 aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBQb2xpY3kgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0IGh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMGQGA1UdHwRdMFswLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMIGEBggrBgEFBQcBAQR4MHYwNwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGK2h0 dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIvY2xhc3MzL3VzZXIvY2EwOwYIKwYBBQUHMAKG L2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIuY2xhc3MzLnVzZXIuY2EuY3J0MBEGCWCG SAGG+EIBAQQEAwIFoDAxBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EJBYiU3RhcnRDb20gVHJ1c3RlZCBFbWFpbCBD ZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZTAyBglghkgBhvhCAQQEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2Nh LWNybC5jcmwwNQYJYIZIAYb4QgEDBCgWJmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1 My1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjAjBgNVHRIEHDAahhhodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEFBQADggEBAJ0bUvRPg5PXHhf9wqy4fGCKNFpkYaJUQJyfn7VfsTcfnj/IORSpYCnoxneF mbfqnNNhieX7kzq+V0tyoUJWkPsyAfoqa76vqlcCNTfeTVEgeeQG9DooaVGnRGN9plb/YyQb Tu8XZBMtvHooiGLSlr0GD3CWrLD4LaDoVid+at0kuAavFRd6TwNJk2Nn8ADvk6i62taQG11o vZNsWJrB1sa4ltKhAseous2FPx/vg55ztF46a5RMQvyGwVTSxtj+fZ71adrVXPN7edk9vI+I LkXzynzyBUsH2YqQ7OV5h59iJDDwsAHPnHUwj7DRs0o08u+In8qccYUR9UvPWgwfILcxggQs MIIEKAIBATCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMN U3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAt BgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZI hvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoIICSTAYBgkqhkiG 9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wODAxMTYyMjQ5NTVaMCMGCSqG SIb3DQEJBDEWBBSo6pXine0Qh2FBlMnPMsciVThMWDBSBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xRTBDMAoGCCqG SIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG 9w0DAgIBKDCByAYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYG6MIG3MIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMG SXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlm aWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWls IEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZwIDAXiqMIHKBgsq hkiG9w0BCRACCzGBuqCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQG A1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25p bmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEw HwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASC AQCJfwojhmUCAJcVJ6iVRcq5I84yIQ1DVywA71EFHP+dTtgw2UOpcjH1NF3nwaIWnlQGMLtR zgwD9zDkQHqJa2YK+4NwTD7XEky2lYYhAFbs4cZdyYhoCosgUMEYdJF8A6uHO5JnNCE5bx+I gIwQLRlFhgxyMBUYwuh4OqmGN5zBIieCAUuBf+30ZDv8AnMhHiYZzwU4QwBMVdOqB+890TJc N437Z7AminjFHOuQmTYz/h25Ck8keOLHl8NnV+L/oo68TpK3O7IjM7BA7bdLGk95qDejMzJu JibyCXCY6MMHgf69AGfDwadRPTGU9FYh2QEKV3ZiCZJS7kDOVVWJI2igAAAAAAAA --------------ms080001060704090002010209-- --===============1170515783== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============1170515783==-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 16 18:19:06 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFHXD-0002BO-6i; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:19:03 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JFHXC-0002BF-Bo for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:19:02 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFHXB-0002B5-Vi for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:19:02 -0500 Received: from dizzyd.com ([207.210.219.225]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFHXB-0004WT-5R for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:19:01 -0500 Received: from wrk225.corp.jabber.com (dencfw1.jabber.com [207.182.164.5]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by dizzyd.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0898404A0 for ; Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:18:59 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <478E90E2.3020802@stpeter.im> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:18:58 -0700 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Simple] WGLC: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-03.txt References: In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3f3e54d3c03ed638c06aa9fa6861237e X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1400999043==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --===============1400999043== Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms040005050204060506050007" This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms040005050204060506050007 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Robert Sparks wrote: > This is a SIMPLE Working Group Last Call for Comments on > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-03.txt > > Please review this draft carefully. Provide comments to the editor > and/or the list no later than > Monday 21 January 2008. I think this draft needs further work before it is ready for IETF Last Call. As a point of comparison, I have just updated a similar analysis for XMPP: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-saintandre-xmpp-presence-analysis-03.txt Herewith some comments. 1. As I previously expressed on this list, I think it is not a good idea to compare two different technologies in such a document. Therefore I have removed any mention of SIP presence from the XMPP analysis (other than to point to draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis from my I-D), and I suggest that the authors of the SIP/SIMPLE analysis do the same. There are just too many differing assumptions and possible scenarios to accurately compare two presence technologies in a single document (let alone more than two technologies). Therefore I strongly suggest the following: 1a. Modify the second paragraph of Section 1 ("Introduction") to remove references to other presence technologies. 1b. Remove Section 2.10 ("Other Protocols"). In particular, the calculations in this section use SIP terminology, which patently does not apply to non-SIP systems. 1c. Remove the fourth bullet-point in Section 7 ("Conclusions"). In particular, during discussion on this list the claims in this paragraph were shown to be seriously misleading or false. 1d. In several places the analysis claims to apply not just to SIP/SIMPLE presence systems but to presence systems built using any possible presence technology. Extreme care should be taken when making such statements. 2. While working on the XMPP presence analysis just now, I attempted to incorporate the fact that the number of users who are registered with a presence service is typically much greater than the number of users who have an active presence session with the service. In my experience helping to run a fairly large (~300,000 user) consumer-oriented presence and messaging service, typically at most 5% of the users are "online" at any one time. The number of online users within an enterprise deployment is typically higher, on the order or 40% online. To be conservative, in the XMPP analysis I have assumed that 10% of the users at a service provider deployment are online at any one time and that 50% of the users at an enterprise deployment are online at any one time. I do not see that this factor has been taken into account in the SIP/SIMPLE analysis (though perhaps I am missing something). I think it is extremely important to take the registered vs. online factor into account because this is the usage pattern that presence systems experience in the real world and those who read these presence analyses will quickly be scared off if we don't do so (they will just look at the number of users and assume that is the number of concurrent presence sessions). 3. The real-world numbers in Section 2.2 ("Assumptions") are helpful, but they are incomplete: 3a. What are the numbers of registered users and concurrent users for the "large consumer network"? 3b. Are the 110 users (consumer network) and 200 users (enterprise) in the watch list total users or federated users? Only the number of federated users is important for this analysis. 3c. Why is the peak number of instant messages mentioned for the consumer network? This analysis deals only with presence. 3d. It is mentioned that about 50% of the enterprise users are online at any one time. What percentage of the users at the consumer network are online at any one time? And (as mentioned) is this kind of percentage factored into the calculations? 4. The inclusion of full vs. partial notifies, dialog optimizations, NOTIFY optimizations, and so on makes the calculations very involved and confusing to read (e.g., I have not yet had time to review them all in detail). Can they be simplified somehow? 5. I think it might help to make the scenarios a bit more realistic, at least by explaining how a particular scenario might apply in the real world (e.g., "this scenario is similar to what might be observed in the context of federation between two large service providers"). I have tried to do that in version -03 of the XMPP analysis, but we could even go farther. 6. When I attempted to address the issue of real-world relevance, I found that several of the scenarios in the XMPP analysis diverged from the scenarios in the SIP analysis. I would be happy to work directly with the authors of draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis to sync up on the scenarios. That's it for now. Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ --------------ms040005050204060506050007 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYQDCC B3AwggbZoAMCAQICAQowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQAwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQI EwZJc3JhZWwxDjAMBgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYD VQQLExFDQSBBdXRob3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlv biBBdXRob3JpdHkxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAeFw0wNTA0 MDUxNDUyMTNaFw0xMDA0MDQxNDUyMTNaMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNy YWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNh dGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZy ZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAPEaOcSx5ZNexwo1zJNcX48UV0UtkNtWX3qa9ZaX2VZilgIz eIrObloQV0Ma2rdgqosW9xMb5u3lBVIumt7fEwgMqqtDa3F2Qudelv93P9z2nbmn7X4GnCKA IQcW97KOSgQQHaVPHq03xGFbszx+LOKrBi/xv3bcGxtYrH+10M1nHbCRo8U2+zcJQowxoI+O U5nhko9vU25Jp8ZQ2fROH6C2TSjZuanzMTyvc5+dJiN2Hm2MhAMrqO7pUGhDKuUvnmKpAcwj eYQHU51mvlB4IId+4bTEwVoG4AMJ8RXB47VdJevN0yqeJSACyoRft4w4OpqFysR1HTT6aE6u xLg9ZC0CAwEAAaOCBBMwggQPMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wCwYDVR0PBAQDAgHmMB0GA1Ud DgQWBBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZCDCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQcicOWzL3+MtUNjIEx tpidjShkjaGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UE BxMFRWlsYXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0 eSBEZXAuMSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8G CSqGSIb3DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEAMB0GA1UdEQQWMBSBEmFkbWluQHN0 YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAdBgNVHRIEFjAUgRJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwYgYDVR0fBFswWTAp oCegJYYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NhLWNybC5jcmwwLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6 Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NybC9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMIIBSgYDVR0gBIIBQTCCAT0wggE5 BgsrBgEEAYG1NwEBATCCASgwLwYIKwYBBQUHAgEWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y Zy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvaW50 ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCBvQYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgbAwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGX TGltaXRlZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25z KiBvZiB0aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkgUG9saWN5IGF2YWls YWJsZSBhdCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjARBglghkgBhvhC AQEEBAMCAAcwUAYJYIZIAYb4QgENBEMWQVN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUgRnJlZSBTU0wgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGVzMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBBAQlFiNo dHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY2EtY3JsLmNybDAzBglghkgBhvhCAQMEJhYkaHR0 cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NydC1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRw Oi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFAAOBgQBc1g6H yT3ZrGb0Kq+kkqetnSXtcwffHEr6Tia2XqCqPLLzdZ8VTxVjeq/Kpg2u+8cGASIl1U45XmWa v4Vez+jSSnChRHwidmbwjCtNBFxr4C/Nkgs8wk2zNQbh+zlDKNophJT7+DVOhnIMJzdNkQW0 4STurMCFwLoyx5k1rDHQYTCCCGIwggdKoAMCAQICAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBrzEL MAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEj MCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29t IENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBz dGFydGNvbS5vcmcwHhcNMDcwODIyMjExMzI3WhcNMDgwODIxMjExMzI3WjCBujELMAkGA1UE BhMCVVMxETAPBgNVBAgTCENvbG9yYWRvMQ8wDQYDVQQHEwZEZW52ZXIxGjAYBgNVBAoTEVBl dGVyIFNhaW50LUFuZHJlMSwwKgYDVQQLEyNTdGFydENvbSBUcnVzdGVkIENlcnRpZmljYXRl IE1lbWJlcjEaMBgGA1UEAxMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQtQW5kcmUxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEnN0 cGV0ZXJAc3RwZXRlci5pbTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBALC1dkqD gghuvUCkEloRDX50TTJ6Szj1BqtMpYq+An66BwkWfP07uay+jHori77776wk1/Ajk1nTSHX+ JWo+JWwVXYWBX+Zd780bB0FGShYlHGwMhd/pxX9sT4KW3D+r8sIHVbTGdudSweuNdBhqr1iE cjze75hpywMkk1OQhTkseQxI5owa9M31JOdNEX0Ja6esyhwwtqqTNC86OujXwa2wew8GTRJE 9p2I0B1VCsKuJaPatbIcf9OFiTSODb5vyoq3+lrElh6V6BXKxEfQ4D2HCSY+5UmlKdnltzvN bqxyaTYQi1YGsFzew7ST3R8P5jrCq2cvRjGrTKVojZXgPZ0CAwEAAaOCBHgwggR0MAwGA1Ud EwQFMAMCAQAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSwMB0GA1UdJQQWMBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAd BgNVHQ4EFgQUl7CU2dS/alOwLIHV/Oc2RkGDYugwgd0GA1UdIwSB1TCB0oAUBKzbJHdTRkaW XxcBXH1CR71IGQihgbakgbMwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQIEwZJc3JhZWwxDjAM BgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYDVQQLExFDQSBBdXRo b3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkx ITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZ4IBCjCCAUAGA1UdIASCATcwggEz MIIBLwYLKwYBBAGBtTcBAQQwggEeMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjAvBggrBgEFBQcCARYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgbMGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGmMBQWDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4wAwIB ARqBjUxpbWl0ZWQgTGlhYmlsaXR5LCByZWFkIHRoZSBzZWN0aW9uICpMZWdhbCBMaW1pdGF0 aW9ucyogb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gUG9saWN5IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBh dCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjBkBgNVHR8EXTBbMCygKqAo hiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDov L2NybC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDCBhAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEeDB2MDcGCCsG AQUFBzABhitodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViL2NsYXNzMy91c2VyL2NhMDsG CCsGAQUFBzAChi9odHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViLmNsYXNzMy51c2VyLmNh LmNydDARBglghkgBhvhCAQEEBAMCBaAwMQYJYIZIAYb4QgENBCQWIlN0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0 ZWQgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUwMgYJYIZIAYb4QgEEBCUWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMDUGCWCGSAGG+EIBAwQoFiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAyBglghkgBhvhCAQgEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3Jn MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQCdG1L0T4OT1x4X/cKsuHxgijRaZGGiVECcn5+1X7E3H54/ yDkUqWAp6MZ3hZm36pzTYYnl+5M6vldLcqFCVpD7MgH6Kmu+r6pXAjU33k1RIHnkBvQ6KGlR p0RjfaZW/2MkG07vF2QTLbx6KIhi0pa9Bg9wlqyw+C2g6FYnfmrdJLgGrxUXek8DSZNjZ/AA 75OoutrWkBtdaL2TbFiawdbGuJbSoQLHqLrNhT8f74Oec7ReOmuUTEL8hsFU0sbY/n2e9Wna 1Vzze3nZPbyPiC5F88p88gVLB9mKkOzleYefYiQw8LABz5x1MI+w0bNKNPLviJ/KnHGFEfVL z1oMHyC3MIIIYjCCB0qgAwIBAgIDAXiqMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJ TDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpT ZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQ cmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y ZzAeFw0wNzA4MjIyMTEzMjdaFw0wODA4MjEyMTEzMjdaMIG6MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzERMA8G A1UECBMIQ29sb3JhZG8xDzANBgNVBAcTBkRlbnZlcjEaMBgGA1UEChMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQt QW5kcmUxLDAqBgNVBAsTI1N0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0ZWQgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgTWVtYmVyMRow GAYDVQQDExFQZXRlciBTYWludC1BbmRyZTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3RwZXRlckBzdHBl dGVyLmltMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAsLV2SoOCCG69QKQSWhEN fnRNMnpLOPUGq0ylir4CfroHCRZ8/Tu5rL6MeiuLvvvvrCTX8COTWdNIdf4laj4lbBVdhYFf 5l3vzRsHQUZKFiUcbAyF3+nFf2xPgpbcP6vywgdVtMZ251LB6410GGqvWIRyPN7vmGnLAyST U5CFOSx5DEjmjBr0zfUk500RfQlrp6zKHDC2qpM0Lzo66NfBrbB7DwZNEkT2nYjQHVUKwq4l o9q1shx/04WJNI4Nvm/Kirf6WsSWHpXoFcrER9DgPYcJJj7lSaUp2eW3O81urHJpNhCLVgaw XN7DtJPdHw/mOsKrZy9GMatMpWiNleA9nQIDAQABo4IEeDCCBHQwDAYDVR0TBAUwAwIBADAL BgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSX sJTZ1L9qU7AsgdX85zZGQYNi6DCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZ CKGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UEBxMFRWls YXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0eSBEZXAu MSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3 DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEKMIIBQAYDVR0gBIIBNzCCATMwggEvBgsrBgEE AYG1NwEBBDCCAR4wNQYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKWh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9pbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUucGRmMC8GCCsGAQUFBwIBFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjCBswYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgaYwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGNTGltaXRl ZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25zKiBvZiB0 aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBQb2xpY3kgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0IGh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMGQGA1UdHwRdMFswLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMIGEBggrBgEFBQcBAQR4MHYwNwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGK2h0 dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIvY2xhc3MzL3VzZXIvY2EwOwYIKwYBBQUHMAKG L2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIuY2xhc3MzLnVzZXIuY2EuY3J0MBEGCWCG SAGG+EIBAQQEAwIFoDAxBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EJBYiU3RhcnRDb20gVHJ1c3RlZCBFbWFpbCBD ZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZTAyBglghkgBhvhCAQQEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2Nh LWNybC5jcmwwNQYJYIZIAYb4QgEDBCgWJmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1 My1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjAjBgNVHRIEHDAahhhodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEFBQADggEBAJ0bUvRPg5PXHhf9wqy4fGCKNFpkYaJUQJyfn7VfsTcfnj/IORSpYCnoxneF mbfqnNNhieX7kzq+V0tyoUJWkPsyAfoqa76vqlcCNTfeTVEgeeQG9DooaVGnRGN9plb/YyQb Tu8XZBMtvHooiGLSlr0GD3CWrLD4LaDoVid+at0kuAavFRd6TwNJk2Nn8ADvk6i62taQG11o vZNsWJrB1sa4ltKhAseous2FPx/vg55ztF46a5RMQvyGwVTSxtj+fZ71adrVXPN7edk9vI+I LkXzynzyBUsH2YqQ7OV5h59iJDDwsAHPnHUwj7DRs0o08u+In8qccYUR9UvPWgwfILcxggQs MIIEKAIBATCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMN U3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAt BgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZI hvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoIICSTAYBgkqhkiG 9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wODAxMTYyMzE4NThaMCMGCSqG SIb3DQEJBDEWBBSCzUPjo+v/J0PCO0F81LF9il2M8DBSBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xRTBDMAoGCCqG SIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG 9w0DAgIBKDCByAYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYG6MIG3MIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMG SXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlm aWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWls IEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZwIDAXiqMIHKBgsq hkiG9w0BCRACCzGBuqCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQG A1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25p bmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEw HwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASC AQCRYb/SgnNS7NTOiYIE2UbrULlT9DZlpsBYFjIsVagtg0/rw6fEKTgGyyntEAejMS396dDt ahwV8epKfjYQEpE4gADl3VpryBmH/njf59pFKS6xfc3+qsim6Wk1oqcWKWL98uCHmIMZOlWG ZJd1VUvvWdFCbAAjZxmOCIG4FCsVhxQGUILIbrgX6DZXiSzhB//cZgOyzIKm7eFmak4TBwwW MBjI8WS+E0ZDna10Pa1m5zJlMP8b77dCMV4R5PalljpuKtz0RmjAT9+IQFDZvsCq8XaxAckG tIAumrHpVBiBTtLOrqnK6lV6XHhQ4fj5P3pHR5UyHYwE3MGwu1S53h6pAAAAAAAA --------------ms040005050204060506050007-- --===============1400999043== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============1400999043==-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jan 17 00:23:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFNDZ-00081p-Oe; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:23:09 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JFNDY-00081j-RR for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:23:08 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFNDX-00081a-W0 for simple@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:23:08 -0500 Received: from [125.21.188.69] (helo=mail.orgltd.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFNDX-0002GW-D6 for simple@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:23:07 -0500 Received: by mail.orgltd.com (Postfix, from userid 100) id 15FF785E4C; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:48:56 +0530 (IST) Received: from orgvikas (unknown [219.91.223.35]) by mail.orgltd.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C895F85DFE for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:48:55 +0530 (IST) From: "Vikas Tandon" To: References: <478E90E2.3020802@stpeter.im> In-Reply-To: <478E90E2.3020802@stpeter.im> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 10:52:38 +0530 Message-ID: <013901c858c9$00e24a00$02a6de00$@tandon@orgltd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: AchYlcNMD3Zw66gFQpq80vEzE+e45AAMgayA Content-Language: en-us x-cr-puzzleid: {56B9BE00-E2E9-4932-A263-278EC9F93599} x-cr-hashedpuzzle: CJjR C5kQ C9OI EeO+ ElFD F+Tz GyFV ID9P IKKY IOlN IWjE IfbV Is1h Iv+N JfVa Jmit; 1; cwBpAG0AcABsAGUAQABpAGUAdABmAC4AbwByAGcA; Sosha1_v1; 7; {56B9BE00-E2E9-4932-A263-278EC9F93599}; dgBpAGsAYQBzAC4AdABhAG4AZABvAG4AQABvAHIAZwBsAHQAZAAuAGMAbwBtAA==; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 05:14:20 GMT; dQBuAHMAdQBiAHMAYwByAGkAYgBlAA== X-Copyrighted-Material: Please visit http://www.company.com/privacy.htm X-Spam-Score: 4.4 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1 Subject: [Simple] unsubscribe X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org unsubscribe Confidentiality

Confidentiality: Information transmitted by this EMAIL is proprietary of ORG GROUP and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient of this EMAIL immediately notify the sender and delete the Email including attachments, if any. For further information about ORG please see our website at http://www.orgltd.com/

 

_______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From epalmer@lowpricegame.com Thu Jan 17 07:31:41 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFTuH-0002UH-68; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:31:41 -0500 Received: from [195.28.51.214] (helo=c214-51.ntt.ru) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFTuG-0004Em-0E; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 07:31:40 -0500 Received: from [195.28.51.214] by searchmx.name-services.com; Thu, 16 Jan 2008 15:30:21 +0300 Message-ID: <01c85854$b491a480$d6331cc3@epalmer> From: "Christian Tipton" To: Subject: Space Shuttle Tapestry Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2008 15:30:21 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Spam-Score: 3.1 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 forget about losing your erection in the middle of sexual intercourse, as Man-XL will keep it strong and firm http://gqiv.spodoii.com From Quaye@backgroundactors.net Thu Jan 17 09:02:25 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFVK5-0006Qt-Fb for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:02:25 -0500 Received: from host23-113-dynamic.2-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([87.2.113.23] helo=host157-112-dynamic.54-82-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFVJz-0000BW-Vb for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:02:20 -0500 Received: from angelo by backgroundactors.net with ASMTP id F75D2E2D for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:02:36 +0100 Received: from angelo ([175.131.62.136]) by backgroundactors.net with ESMTP id 6EF21ABF7343 for ; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:02:36 +0100 Message-ID: <9F074315.322DCCF2@backgroundactors.net> Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 15:02:24 +0100 From: "Mikaela Quaye" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: hgrafton Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Women love men with huge dicks, enlarge yours today! http://voleoyset.com/
From thetoy@getcingular.com Thu Jan 17 09:40:31 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFVux-0005nP-C7; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:40:31 -0500 Received: from [88.237.201.100] (helo=[88.237.201.100]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFVuw-0002YU-5c; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:40:31 -0500 Received: from [88.237.201.100] by getcingular.com.inbound15.mxlogic.net; Thu, 16 Jan 2008 16:39:12 +0200 Message-ID: <01c8585e$52d63800$64c9ed58@thetoy> From: "Sara Mcdermott" To: Subject: Potato Spiral Hose Shoes Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2008 16:39:12 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 4.4 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 We sell only popular medication s. Dont miss out on this huge savings http://dzillasite.com the pressure, the report says.has a in the shuffle, own thing," stressed-out relate to others and over and just play. for your kids if youtrouble finding buddies three mornings trouble finding buddies From Lorin_MacLaren@basiq.net Thu Jan 17 20:14:59 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFfox-0000Oc-Rq for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:14:59 -0500 Received: from aazu165.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl ([83.6.158.165] helo=aaqx204.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFfox-0002kE-Eo for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:14:59 -0500 Received: from wim ([190.174.184.87] helo=wim) by aaqx204.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl ( sendmail 8.13.3/8.13.1) with esmtpa id 1QJTkz-000YOS-tZ for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:15:20 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 02:15:01 +0100 From: "Lorin MacLaren" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: bbawzked Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080117-0, 2008-01-17), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 2.5 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Have the LARGEST cock in town, today! http://www.dopoiess.com/
From negotiatorsbi5@thomasmoser.com Fri Jan 18 01:50:25 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFl3Z-0000cB-08 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:50:25 -0500 Received: from [89.109.213.31] (helo=[89.109.213.31]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFl3X-0001Og-QF; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 01:50:24 -0500 Received: from [89.109.213.31] by MAIL.thomasmoser.com; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:50:23 +0300 From: "Rene Valentine" To: Subject: RonFuckstickImportant Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:50:23 +0300 Message-ID: <01c859b7$8b3d5980$1fd56d59@negotiatorsbi5> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4963.1700 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 JordanWide-rangingPhallus http://www.fiutitd.com From TimothydisposableClark@50states.com Fri Jan 18 08:01:37 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFqqn-0002bj-Gr for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 08:01:37 -0500 Received: from m85-94-165-141.andorpac.ad ([85.94.165.141] helo=jordipujol) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFqqn-0002Ts-1J for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 08:01:37 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host69127525.50states.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id oupPJy8280.978803.9e3.6Bn.6334806483491 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:00:19 -0100 Message-ID: <1c0e6f01c859d2$39642dd0$8da55e55@jordipujol> From: "Anthony Lopez" To: Subject: suburbia Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:00:19 -0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1C0E6B_01C859D2.39642DD0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 4.2 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1C0E6B_01C859D2.39642DD0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable olin Get your controlled medication at http://www.yesipharm.com ------=_NextPart_000_1C0E6B_01C859D2.39642DD0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable welsh Get your controlled medication at http://www.yesipharm.com ------=_NextPart_000_1C0E6B_01C859D2.39642DD0-- From HarveywheneverFuller@refunddomains.com Fri Jan 18 09:35:20 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFsJU-00008c-CE; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:35:20 -0500 Received: from cpe-76-189-30-219.neo.res.rr.com ([76.189.30.219] helo=romen.belkin) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFsJU-00052r-69; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:35:20 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host76218310.refunddomains.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id M9OWVeQL51.930973.0t6.oPJ.7145582183093 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 09:34:29 +0500 Message-ID: <81e1801c859df$45ef0310$0202a8c0@romen> From: "Karl Stanley" To: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_81E14_01C859DF.45EF0310-- From OllieawfulMclean@youthspecialties.com Fri Jan 18 13:16:47 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFvln-0006rI-HA; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:16:47 -0500 Received: from ip-148-243.tricom.net ([190.6.148.243] helo=marielyn) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JFvln-0005M7-2Z; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:16:47 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by host84634468.youthspecialties.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id veaubt2c21.427103.0LS.9zq.4948317649238 for ; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:16:32 -0100 Message-ID: <418bd01c859fe$4acad070$0301a8c0@marielyn> From: "Maynard Randolph" To: , =20

When you are young and stressed = up…
When you are aged and never give up…
Even if you have no erection problems Viagra would help you to make = better=20 sex more often.
Learn More Now

------=_NextPart_000_418B9_01C859FE.4ACAD070-- From MindysentientHand@golf.com Fri Jan 18 19:55:18 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JG1zS-0000gL-SQ; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:55:18 -0500 Received: from [79.146.121.94] (helo=equipo) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JG1zR-0002bM-Ua; Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:55:18 -0500 Message-ID: <3d46101c85a35$f1a443e0$0601a8c0@equipo> From: "Lorena Burkett" To: , =20
Your credit history = does not=20 matter to us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 need IMMEDIATE money to spend ANY way you like or wish Extra money to = give the=20 company a boost or need A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here = is=20 best deal we can offer you NOW (hurry, this tender will expire THIS=20 NIGHT):
=20
 
$27,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when our deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply finish this quick form...
=20
 
Don't worry about = approval, your=20 credit history will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://grandplacea.net.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_3D45D_01C85A35.F1A443E0-- From mareschqnze@cazoom.dk Sat Jan 19 20:08:45 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGOg1-0007JX-Fd for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 20:08:45 -0500 Received: from host172-17-dynamic.52-82-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([82.52.17.172] helo=host126-53-dynamic.17-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGOg0-0004jX-O5 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sat, 19 Jan 2008 20:08:45 -0500 Received: from GIGLIOLA ([159.179.9.155]:19421 "EHLO GIGLIOLA" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by host126-53-dynamic.17-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it with ESMTP id S22RVSPRZETFSNRY (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:09:04 +0100 Message-ID: <7BC6B733.5516A3D3@cazoom.dk> Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 02:08:40 +0100 From: "sad maresch" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: unrind Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.5 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Have a cannon in your pants the size of a howitzer http://www.lendstui.com/
From s.scory@biotechpathway.com Mon Jan 21 06:10:24 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGuXo-0000ds-MB; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:10:24 -0500 Received: from n1.pro-internet.pl ([193.189.116.1]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGuXl-00023p-7J; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:10:22 -0500 Received: from [193.189.116.1] by antares.teamwhere.ch; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:08:58 +0100 From: "Trina Laird" To: Subject: Compass Bird Spiral Grapes Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:08:58 +0100 Message-ID: <01c85c26$669ae900$0174bdc1@s.scory> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4115 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 of free play time, and marketing pitches activities can be the report says. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ We have popular med s. Dont miss out on this huge savings http://dependmiddle.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ successful children. Above all, If it occurs on the floor with trouble finding buddies in low-income, violence-proneher kids and ballet for each things you can do so many parents successful children. Above all, beneficial but should not be viewed Jennifer Gervasio as a requirement Many parentswith the other kids."Academy stress for children plenty of time "In the current environment where her kids their own passions, when they can of me that just do their things you can do 5-year-old son he not be on par children are plopped in time, it can increase risks for begin as early as infancy.and ballet for each on the floor with compared with have the resources, is an important one," said Dr. Kenneth says the report, From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 21 06:50:39 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGvAg-00010N-CN; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:50:34 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JGvAe-00010E-Vv for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:50:32 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGvAe-000106-Kx; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:50:32 -0500 Received: from ns3.neustar.com ([156.154.24.138]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGvAe-0003DU-87; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:50:32 -0500 Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com [10.31.47.10]) by ns3.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF597175C3; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:50:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JGvA9-0002ca-Ed; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:50:01 -0500 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 06:50:01 -0500 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 73734d43604d52d23b3eba644a169745 Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] I-D Action:draft-ietf-simple-partial-notify-10.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) extension for Partial Notification of Presence Information Author(s) : M. Lonnfors, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-simple-partial-notify-10.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2008-01-21 By default, presence delivered using the Presence Event Package for the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) is represented in the Presence Information Data Format (PIDF). A PIDF document contains a set of elements, each representing a different aspect of the presence being reported. When any subset of the elements change, even just a single element, a new document containing the full set of elements is delivered. This memo defines an extension allowing delivery of only the presence data that has actually changed. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-partial-notify-10.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-simple-partial-notify-10.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-partial-notify-10.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-01-21064902.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-partial-notify-10.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-simple-partial-notify-10.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-01-21064902.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --NextPart-- From estipula@alcoholcube.com Mon Jan 21 07:26:08 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGvj6-0001ht-4r for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 07:26:08 -0500 Received: from host59-5-static.15-79-b.business.telecomitalia.it ([79.15.5.59]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JGvj5-0004Ap-HJ for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 07:26:08 -0500 Received: from Segreteria ([107.165.105.16]:15221 "EHLO Segreteria" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: TLS-PEER-CN1: ) by host59-5-static.15-79-b.business.telecomitalia.it with ESMTP id S22OALZEFXAUOPWU (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:27:21 +0100 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:26:52 +0100 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: essawees Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.4 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de Thanks to this miracle solution, I can now penetrate her deeper and
longer http://iieaobbf.com/
From peiden@huntleychevrolet.com Mon Jan 21 18:14:38 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JH5qg-0006JL-A9; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:14:38 -0500 Received: from hunter1856.roamr.utk.edu ([216.96.129.183] helo=Hunter) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JH5qf-0005SP-70; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:14:38 -0500 Received: from [216.96.129.183] by mx.huntleychevrolet.com; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:13:14 -0500 Message-ID: <01c85c59$49cbd900$b78160d8@peiden> From: "Frederic Oliver" To: Subject: Cycle Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:13:14 -0500 Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:13:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Our complete line of Med s are at huge discounts See us today http://cevxer.levelskin.com From akstcalloptinonlinemnsdgs@alloptinonline.com Mon Jan 21 20:39:34 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JH86w-00032M-At; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:39:34 -0500 Received: from [121.128.193.200] (helo=ck6h227knex4twf.kornet) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JH86t-0000hf-8c; Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:39:32 -0500 Received: from [121.128.193.200] by mx1.alloptinonline.com; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:49:12 +0900 Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 10:49:12 +0900 From: "Christopher Weiss" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.80.06) Educational Reply-To: akstcalloptinonlinemnsdgs@alloptinonline.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <140857027.73406676906673@alloptinonline.com> To: sigtran-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Weiss MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db hey Would you like to have a long dick http://jinrost.com From zyougehamyt@youbuyifry.com Tue Jan 22 12:31:00 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHMxg-0006ae-HK for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:31:00 -0500 Received: from 203stb73.codetel.net.do ([66.98.23.203]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHMxg-0003c2-4s for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:31:00 -0500 Received: by 10.126.181.20 with SMTP id CtOOJyXubTMuP; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:54:05 -0400 (GMT) Received: by 192.168.235.209 with SMTP id LkVObivsfZrgFi.2430887545092; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:54:03 -0400 (GMT) Message-ID: <7C8AEA02.CCBC31CB@youbuyifry.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:54:00 -0400 From: User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (Windows/20070326) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: zigatame Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080122-1, 01/22/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 4.4 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 In 3 months, have a brand new you and a huge monster in your pants http://www.zbhoafhs.com/
From ahedge@groceryshopping.net Tue Jan 22 12:37:50 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHN4I-0006e4-He; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:37:50 -0500 Received: from [92.80.90.29] (helo=[92.80.90.29]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHN4H-0003mw-7O; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 12:37:50 -0500 Received: from [92.80.90.29] by groceryshopping.net.s5a2.psmtp.com; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:36:25 +0200 Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:36:25 +0200 From: "Trent Childs" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.5.30) Professional Reply-To: ahedge@groceryshopping.net X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <025886338.47800514479355@groceryshopping.net> To: sigtran-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Tapestry Tue, 22 Jan 2008 19:36:25 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 Our complete line of Med s are at huge discounts See us today http://towardvary.com From paul@thesoundministry.com Tue Jan 22 17:18:25 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHRRp-0003J8-Pe; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:18:25 -0500 Received: from [124.254.176.9] (helo=somsponge) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHRRo-0005Bi-LR; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:18:25 -0500 Received: from [124.254.176.9] by smtp.secureserver.net; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:17:00 +0900 Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:17:00 +0900 From: "Lucas Kimble" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.80.06) Educational Reply-To: paul@thesoundministry.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <926166391.67045803756166@thesoundministry.com> To: rsvp-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Pants Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:17:00 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 We can get you hard as a rock http://mosterba.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 23 07:22:00 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHec5-0005RD-0T; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:21:53 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JHec3-0005R5-Jf for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:21:51 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHec3-0005PF-92 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:21:51 -0500 Received: from violet.upc.es ([147.83.2.51]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHec1-00068D-Aa for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 07:21:51 -0500 Received: from entelserver.upc.edu (entelserver.upc.es [147.83.39.4]) by violet.upc.es (8.14.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0NCLmX9021936 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:21:48 +0100 Received: from [147.83.47.151] (c5s102-151.upc.es [147.83.47.151]) by entelserver.upc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BD062CBCF2 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:21:42 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <479731CF.80400@entel.upc.es> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:23:43 +0100 From: =?windows-1252?Q?Victoria_Beltr=E1n_Mart=EDnez?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed X-Mail-Scanned: Criba 2.0 + Clamd X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (violet.upc.es [147.83.2.51]); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:21:48 +0100 (CET) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by violet.upc.es id m0NCLmX9021936 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f60d0f7806b0c40781eee6b9cd0b2135 Subject: [Simple] draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-03.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I have read=20 http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling= -analysis-03.txt=20 and I would like to comment some issues: 1.- Each time you compute the number of bytes of NOTIFY messages when=20 dialog optimization is used, you don't add the size of the multipart=20 boundary associated with the RLMI document. If you see RFC 4662, you=20 will see that there is a multipart boundary just before the RLMI=20 document. For example, in the computation of I07 variable, I think that=20 the most correct calculation of bytes for NOTIFY messages should be=20 (I03*C06*(C09+C15+C14))+(I03*C06*C04*(C11+C13+C14)), instead of=20 (I03*C06*(C09+C15))+(I03*C06*C04*(C11+C13+C14)). Anyway the difference=20 between both formulas is small. 2.- In S08 variable calculation, you calculate the bytes of NOTIFY=20 messages by the following way: If dialog optimization is not used: C06*(SO6*(C09+C15+C11+C13+C14)) If dialog optimization is used: C06*(S06*((C09+C15)+(C04*(C11+C13+C14)))) I don=92t understand these formulas. I think that the computation should=20 be C06*(SO6*(C09+C11)) without dialog optimization, because C13, C14 and=20 C15 variables don=92t make sense in this case. When dialog optimization is used you say "See section 4.5 in [12]. The=20 fact that the full state needs to be returned in a NOTIFY response...".=20 However, in section 4.5 of RFC 4662 there are no signs of necessity or=20 requirement of full state, but full state is only recommended via the=20 following sentence: "Immediate notifications triggered as a result of=20 subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages SHOULD include an RLMI document in which=20 the full state is indicated". SHOULD word indicates recommendation, not=20 requirement. We can't state that full state is required on the basis of=20 section 4.5 of RFC 4662. However, in section 5.2 of the same RFC the=20 following is stated: "The first NOTIFY sent in a subscription MUST=20 contain full state, as must the first NOTIFY sent after receipt of a=20 SUBSCRIBE request for the subscription". I think that the authors wanted=20 to say that a full state NOTIFY message after both initial and=20 subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages is required. It means that only NOTIFY=20 messages due to presence changes can contain partial state. If I am=20 right, both sentences (in 4.5 and 5.2 sections) are a bit contradictory.=20 Nevertheless, if the sentence in 5.2 section means what I think, would=20 it be better to refer to section 5.2 in the draft (not to section 4.5).=20 What do you think? 3.- In the computation of T07 variable, it is assumed that only a single=20 presentity is changed when dialog optimization is used. I don=92t=20 understand why this assumption is done. RFC 4662 does not make=20 difference between subsequent and terminating SUBSCRIBE messages. Then,=20 the previous reason to include full state in NOTIFY messages (triggered=20 by receipts of subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages) is also applicable to=20 terminating SUBSCRIBE messages. I don't find any reason to treat=20 terminating messages differently. In my opinion terminating NOTIFY=20 messages had better containing full state RLMI lists in which=20 presentities have =93terminated=94 state. By "terminated" state the=20 presentities=92 presence documents don=92t need to be added into the NOTI= FY=20 message. With this consideration the computation of bytes due to=20 terminating NOTIFYs would be: T03*C06*(C09 +C14+C15+C04*C13) (I have included C14 variable for the boundary after RLMI document) Victoria Beltr=E1n _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 23 10:29:20 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHhXP-0005am-Hc; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:29:15 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JHhXN-0005TJ-Nd for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:29:13 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHhXN-0005TB-Di for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:29:13 -0500 Received: from mtagate6.de.ibm.com ([195.212.29.155]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHhXG-00026Q-Ih for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 10:29:13 -0500 Received: from d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.49]) by mtagate6.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m0NFT2pi077200 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:29:02 GMT Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.165.228]) by d12nrmr1607.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v8.7) with ESMTP id m0NFT2Np1282170 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:29:02 +0100 Received: from d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id m0NFT1aI025637 for ; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:29:01 +0100 Received: from d12mc102.megacenter.de.ibm.com (d12mc102.megacenter.de.ibm.com [9.149.167.114]) by d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0NFT19i025634; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:29:01 +0100 In-Reply-To: <479731CF.80400@entel.upc.es> References: <479731CF.80400@entel.upc.es> To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Victoria_Beltr=E1n_Mart=EDnez?= Subject: Re: [Simple] draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-03.txt MIME-Version: 1.0 X-KeepSent: 48F9E39B:6E606DFD-C22573D9:004818F6; type=4; name=$KeepSent X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 8.0NP August 02, 2007 From: Avshalom Houri Message-ID: Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 17:29:00 +0200 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D12MC102/12/M/IBM(Release 8.0|August 02, 2007) at 23/01/2008 17:29:00, Serialize complete at 23/01/2008 17:29:00 X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: 410b68b37343617c6913e76d02180b14 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0191875442==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. --===============0191875442== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 005513B1C22573D9_=" This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 005513B1C22573D9_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Victoria, Many thanks for your continuos review. Comments below. --Avshalom Victoria Beltr=E1n Mart=EDnez wrote on 23/01/2008 = 14:23:43: > Hi, >=20 > I have read=20 > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-interdomain- > scaling-analysis-03.txt=20 > and I would like to comment some issues: >=20 > 1.- Each time you compute the number of bytes of NOTIFY messages when=20 > dialog optimization is used, you don't add the size of the multipart=20 > boundary associated with the RLMI document. If you see RFC 4662, you=20 > will see that there is a multipart boundary just before the RLMI=20 > document. For example, in the computation of I07 variable, I think that=20 > the most correct calculation of bytes for NOTIFY messages should be=20 > (I03*C06*(C09+C15+C14))+(I03*C06*C04*(C11+C13+C14)), instead of=20 > (I03*C06*(C09+C15))+(I03*C06*C04*(C11+C13+C14)). Anyway the difference=20 > between both formulas is small. >=20 Correct. Will add this. > 2.- In S08 variable calculation, you calculate the bytes of NOTIFY=20 > messages by the following way: >=20 > If dialog optimization is not used: C06*(SO6*(C09+C15+C11+C13+C14)) > If dialog optimization is used:=20 C06*(S06*((C09+C15)+(C04*(C11+C13+C14)))) >=20 > I don?t understand these formulas. I think that the computation should=20 > be C06*(SO6*(C09+C11)) without dialog optimization, because C13, C14 and = > C15 variables don?t make sense in this case. >=20 Correct. Strange mistake. > When dialog optimization is used you say "See section 4.5 in [12]. The=20 > fact that the full state needs to be returned in a NOTIFY response...".=20 > However, in section 4.5 of RFC 4662 there are no signs of necessity or=20 > requirement of full state, but full state is only recommended via the=20 > following sentence: "Immediate notifications triggered as a result of=20 > subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages SHOULD include an RLMI document in which=20 > the full state is indicated". SHOULD word indicates recommendation, not=20 > requirement. We can't state that full state is required on the basis of=20 > section 4.5 of RFC 4662. However, in section 5.2 of the same RFC the=20 > following is stated: "The first NOTIFY sent in a subscription MUST=20 > contain full state, as must the first NOTIFY sent after receipt of a=20 > SUBSCRIBE request for the subscription". I think that the authors wanted = > to say that a full state NOTIFY message after both initial and=20 > subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages is required. It means that only NOTIFY=20 > messages due to presence changes can contain partial state. If I am=20 > right, both sentences (in 4.5 and 5.2 sections) are a bit contradictory. = > Nevertheless, if the sentence in 5.2 section means what I think, would=20 > it be better to refer to section 5.2 in the draft (not to section 4.5).=20 > What do you think? >=20 Agree that I should refer to section 5.2 instead of 4.5. I have interpreted this to mean that the first NOTIFY MUST contain the=20 full state while subsequent ones (even due to subscription refreshes and/or=20 termination) may contain partial state. This alludes to question 3 below also. I am not sure if my interpretation is correct. I think that you can submit = a question to the list for clarification. > 3.- In the computation of T07 variable, it is assumed that only a single = > presentity is changed when dialog optimization is used. I don?t=20 > understand why this assumption is done. RFC 4662 does not make=20 > difference between subsequent and terminating SUBSCRIBE messages. Then,=20 > the previous reason to include full state in NOTIFY messages (triggered=20 > by receipts of subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages) is also applicable to=20 > terminating SUBSCRIBE messages. I don't find any reason to treat=20 > terminating messages differently. In my opinion terminating NOTIFY=20 > messages had better containing full state RLMI lists in which=20 > presentities have ?terminated? state. By "terminated" state the=20 > presentities? presence documents don?t need to be added into the NOTIFY=20 > message. With this consideration the computation of bytes due to=20 > terminating NOTIFYs would be: >=20 > T03*C06*(C09 +C14+C15+C04*C13) > (I have included C14 variable for the boundary after RLMI document) See answer to question 2. >=20 >=20 > Victoria Beltr=E1n >=20 >=20 >=20 > =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --=_alternative 005513B1C22573D9_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Victoria,

Many thanks for your continuos revie= w. Comments below.

--Avshalom

Victoria Beltr=E1n Mart=EDnez <vbeltran@entel.upc= .edu> wrote on 23/01/2008 14:23:43:

> Hi,
>
> I have read
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts= /draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-
> scaling-analysis-03.txt
> and I would like to comment some issues:
>
> 1.- Each time you compute the number of bytes of NOTIFY messages when
> dialog optimization is used, you don't add the size of the multipart
> boundary associated with the RLMI document. If you see RFC 4662, you
> will see that there is a multipart boundary just before the RLMI
> document. For example, in the computation of I07 variable, I think that
> the most correct calculation of bytes for NOTIFY messages should be
> (I03*C06*(C09+C15+C14))+(I03*C06*C04*(C11+C13+C14)), instead of
> (I03*C06*(C09+C15))+(I03*C06*C04*(C11+C13+C14)). Anyway the difference
> between both formulas is small.
>

Correct. Will add this.

> 2.- In S08 variable calculation, you calculate the bytes of NOTIFY
> messages by the following way:
>
> If dialog optimization is not used: C06*(SO6*(C09+C15+C11+C13+C14))
> If dialog optimization is used: C06*(S06*((C09+C15)+(C04*(C11+C13+C14)= )))
>
> I don’t understand these formulas. I think that the computation = should
> be C06*(SO6*(C09+C11)) without dialog optimization, because C13, C14 and
> C15 variables don’t make sense in this case.
>
Correct. Strange mistake.

> When dialog optimization is used you say "See section 4.5 in [12]. The
> fact that the full state needs to be returned in a NOTIFY response...&= quot;.
> However, in section 4.5 of RFC 4662 there are no signs of necessity or
> requirement of full state, but full state is only recommended via the
> following sentence: "Immediate notifications triggered as a result of
> subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages SHOULD include an RLMI document in which
> the full state is indicated". SHOULD word indicates recommendatio= n, not
> requirement. We can't state that full state is required on the basis of
> section 4.5 of RFC 4662. However, in section 5.2 of the same RFC the
> following is stated: "The first NOTIFY sent in a subscription MUST
> contain full state, as must the first NOTIFY sent after receipt of a
> SUBSCRIBE request for the subscription". I think that the authors wanted
> to say that a full state NOTIFY message after both initial and
> subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages is required. It means that only NOTIFY
> messages due to presence changes can contain partial state. If I am
> right, both sentences (in 4.5 and 5.2 sections) are a bit contradictor= y.
> Nevertheless, if the sentence in 5.2 section means what I think, would
> it be better to refer to section 5.2 in the draft (not to section 4.5).
> What do you think?
>

Agree that I should refer to section 5.2 instead of 4.5.
I have interpreted this to mean that the first NOTIFY MUST contain the full state
while subsequent ones (even due to subscription refr= eshes and/or termination) may
contain partial state. This alludes to question 3 below also.
I am not sure if my interpretation is correct. I thi= nk that you can submit a question
to the list for clarification.

> 3.- In the computation of T07 variable, it is assumed that only a single
> presentity is changed when dialog optimization is used. I don’t =
> understand why this assumption is done. RFC 4662 does not make
> difference between subsequent and terminating SUBSCRIBE messages. Then,
> the previous reason to include full state in NOTIFY messages (triggered
> by receipts of subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages) is also applicable to
> terminating SUBSCRIBE messages. I don't find any reason to treat
> terminating messages differently. In my opinion terminating NOTIFY
> messages had better containing full state RLMI lists in which
> presentities have “terminated” state. By "terminated&= quot; state the
> presentities’ presence documents don’t need to be added in= to the NOTIFY
> message. With this consideration the computation of bytes due to
> terminating NOTIFYs would be:
>
> T03*C06*(C09 +C14+C15+C04*C13)
> (I have included C14 variable for the boundary after RLMI document)
See answer to question 2.

>
>
> Victoria Beltr=E1n
>
>
>
> =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F= =5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F=5F
> Simple mailing list
> Simple@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple<= /a>
 --=_alternative 005513B1C22573D9_=-- --===============0191875442== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============0191875442==-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 23 12:51:44 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHjlB-0002A4-Ls; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:51:37 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JHjlA-00029z-FH for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:51:36 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHjlA-00029p-4G for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:51:36 -0500 Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.60]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHjl9-0000Uo-JU for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:51:36 -0500 Received: from mailgw3.ericsson.se (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id B2A5320DFE; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:51:34 +0100 (CET) X-AuditID: c1b4fb3c-ab2eebb0000007e0-ff-47977ea64570 Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se (unknown [153.88.254.123]) by mailgw3.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with ESMTP id 9266720D9A; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:51:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.174]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:51:34 +0100 Received: from mail.lmf.ericsson.se ([131.160.11.50]) by esealmw126.eemea.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:51:34 +0100 Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se [131.160.33.3]) by mail.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2150A2442; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:51:34 +0200 (EET) Received: from nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5047D4DC5A; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:51:32 +0200 (EET) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by nomadiclab.lmf.ericsson.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF3EE4DC59; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:51:31 +0200 (EET) Message-ID: <47977EA3.60103@ericsson.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 19:51:31 +0200 From: Salvatore Loreto User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-OriginalArrivalTime: 23 Jan 2008 17:51:34.0275 (UTC) FILETIME=[97ED0D30:01C85DE8] X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Cc: fluffy@cisco.com, Jon Peterson Subject: [Simple] [Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-loreto-simple-im-srv-label-00] X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Hi, I have submitted this draft to solve the fact discussed within this mailing list a couple of months ago that only XMPP is recorded in the IANA registries for IM Protocol and Presence Protocols, but SIP/SIMPLE is not. /sal -------- Original Message -------- A new version of I-D, draft-loreto-simple-im-srv-label-00.txt has been successfuly submitted by Salvatore Loreto and posted to the IETF repository. Filename: draft-loreto-simple-im-srv-label Revision: 00 Title: Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Registration of Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label registry for SIP/SIMPLE protocol. Creation_date: 2008-01-23 WG ID: Independent Submission Number_of_pages: 6 Abstract: This document registers with the IANA a new Instant Messaging SRV Protocol Label registry for SIP/SIMPLE protocol as specified in Address Resolution for Instant Messaging and Presence. This SRV Protocol Label indicates SIP/SIMPLE protocol as a protocol that will be used to instantiate the instant messaging or presence operations. The IETF Secretariat. _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From quintette77@arlenetdyer.com Wed Jan 23 16:49:59 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHnTr-0000Dj-UK for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:49:59 -0500 Received: from chickenpoxless.seashore.volia.net ([77.122.114.214] helo=best.voliacable.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHnTq-0002zw-Ld for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:49:59 -0500 Received: from [77.122.114.214] by smtp.secureserver.net; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:49:57 +0200 From: "Blanche Morris" To: Subject: HugeCockQueen Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:49:57 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85e1a$a88c8080$d6727a4d@quintette77> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.2 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 ShlongGargantuanMatt http://www.junioeres.com From hashimoto@10s-factory.com Wed Jan 23 18:03:54 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHodN-0004O4-T4; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:03:53 -0500 Received: from [85.239.149.226] (helo=acer-nfqlnau4dm) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHodM-00065C-KP; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 18:03:53 -0500 Received: from [85.239.149.226] by mx01.mshost.interq.or.jp; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:02:27 +0200 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:02:27 +0200 From: "Charles Wyatt" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.10) Personal Reply-To: hashimoto@10s-factory.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <867076655.11230399974017@10s-factory.com> To: sigtran-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Pendulum Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:02:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1250 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7aefe408d50e9c7c47615841cb314bed Enjoy our prices and save with us. Improve your health and budget condition purchasing high quality med s with Canadian Pharmacy online drugstore which offers medications at very low prices. After all our NEW pharmacy I-net page is accomplished!!! http://arvddu.ewertjanet.com/?35448699 From akstcadambaronemnsdgs@adambarone.com Wed Jan 23 22:48:15 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHt4Z-0002uf-CA; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:48:15 -0500 Received: from [211.54.8.86] (helo=[211.54.8.86]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHt4Y-0004dR-1c; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 22:48:15 -0500 Received: from [211.54.8.86] by adambarone.com; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:58:10 +0900 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:58:10 +0900 From: "Maribel Romero" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v3.5.25) Educational Reply-To: akstcadambaronemnsdgs@adambarone.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <456695800.54852358713878@adambarone.com> To: rps-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Re: release Monday MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 2.1 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Enjoy our prices and save with us. Improve your health and budget condition purchasing high quality med s with Canadian Pharmacy online drugstore which offers medications at very low prices. http://batpast.com From abi@pornhorns.com Wed Jan 23 23:40:17 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHtsv-0007Yj-Fc; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:40:17 -0500 Received: from [220.87.152.188] (helo=mycom.kornet) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHtsu-0005ew-4l; Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:40:17 -0500 Received: from [220.87.152.188] by smtp.secureserver.net; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:38:51 +0900 Message-ID: <01c85e8e$74874c10$bc9857dc@abi> From: "Kimberly Burrell" To: Subject: complaint about Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:38:51 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 All kinds of replicas on sale now See us at http://weddlkke.com From recasket@cooltrip.biz Thu Jan 24 01:39:59 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHvkk-0002xC-B4 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:39:58 -0500 Received: from [60.54.54.222] (helo=[60.54.54.222]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHvkj-000816-Fd for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:39:58 -0500 Received: (qmail 68636 invoked from network); Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:39:58 +0800 Received: from unknown (HELO cooltrip.biz) (29.234.204.51) by cosar.org with SMTP; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:39:57 +0800 Received: from localhost.localdomain (conforama.it [75.210.253.215]) by cooltrip.biz (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id TPcSoURS626386 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:39:56 +0800 Message-Id: <911808880308.TPcSoURS626386@592390.conforama.it> Received: from phpmailer ([127.0.0.1]) by conforama.it with HTTP; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:39:56 +0800 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:39:56 +0800 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org From: "recasket" Subject: rauchern X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: phpmailer [version 1.54] Reply-To: recasket@cooltrip.biz MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset = "iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 http://www.oagahigia.com/ Stella giggled with happiness when she grabbed my crotch and realized how large I was From coolies@cilekmedya.com Thu Jan 24 05:40:03 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHzV5-0005Ft-Q1 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 05:40:03 -0500 Received: from [85.72.64.16] (helo=athedsl-309362.home.otenet.gr) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JHzV2-0007cy-5Q for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 05:40:01 -0500 Received: from [85.72.64.16] by mail.cilekmedya.com; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:40:00 +0200 From: "Angelina Cotton" To: Subject: ShellyMan-sizedShlong Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:40:00 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85e86$3c358c30$10404855@coolies> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.7 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 GwenFuckstickTremendous http://www.grayskues.com From replacesh23@argybendlaw.com Thu Jan 24 11:37:12 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI54i-0001He-Gw for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:37:12 -0500 Received: from chello087206134075.chello.pl ([87.206.134.75] helo=ogr.chello.pl) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI54h-0003Ia-Bs for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:37:12 -0500 Received: from [87.206.134.75] by mx01.1and1.com; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:37:11 +0100 From: "Art Chu" To: Subject: HildaCockSuper Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:37:11 +0100 Message-ID: <01c85eaf$bfc97d80$4b86ce57@replacesh23> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 2.9 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 BodypartVoluminousCarey http://www.janeoplane.com From TaniamichelsonCornelius@atkearney.com Thu Jan 24 11:47:10 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI5EM-0005cq-09; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:47:10 -0500 Received: from dyn-91-163-55-207.ppp.tiscali.fr ([91.163.55.207] helo=bulent) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI5EJ-0003Ze-J0; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:47:07 -0500 Message-ID: <39bf01c85ea8$c48f6e30$0301a8c0@bulent> From: "Odessa Jorgensen" To: Subject: Complimentary customize recommendations from a debt specialist Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:46:58 -0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_39BB_01C85EA8.C48F6E30" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 0.4 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_39BB_01C85EA8.C48F6E30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Join the Thousands of Americans GETTING OUT OF DEBT! Be DEBT FREE in as little as 12 MONTHS. Please visit the link below and get a free debt consultation today. NO = OBLIGATION! http://goodcvibe.net.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_39BB_01C85EA8.C48F6E30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Join the Thousands of = Americans GETTING=20 OUT OF DEBT!
 
Be DEBT FREE in as little = as 12=20 MONTHS.
 
Please visit the link = below and get a=20 free debt consultation today. NO OBLIGATION!
 
 ------=_NextPart_000_39BB_01C85EA8.C48F6E30-- From piskorskij@biomedixdevices.com Thu Jan 24 16:00:08 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9B9-0007Ly-Rf; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:00:07 -0500 Received: from [85.204.240.135] (helo=home-r7ar7xcp9z) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9B8-0003Dy-TM; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:00:07 -0500 Received: from [85.204.240.135] by mx.webminders.com; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:58:41 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85edc$a9abe510$87f0cc55@piskorskij> From: "Weldon Jacob" To: Subject: Sphere Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:58:41 +0200 Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:58:41 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4927.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4927.1200 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Enjoy our prices and save with us. Improve your health and budget condition purchasing high quality med s with Canadian Pharmacy online drugstore which offers medications at very low prices. After all our NEW pharmacy I-net page is accomplished!!! http://batpast.com From corrine@saarchitects.net Thu Jan 24 16:04:36 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9FU-0007ns-AH for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:04:36 -0500 Received: from [88.222.17.2] (helo=bms.dokeda.lt) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JI9FT-0003Lu-0B for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:04:36 -0500 Received: from [88.222.17.2] by mx1.netscorp.net; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:04:33 +0200 From: "Mitchell Allred" To: Subject: LadonnaShlongKing-size Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:04:33 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85edd$7b54d680$0211de58@corrine> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4963.1700 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.0 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 MassiveShlongKathrine http://www.janeoplane.com From vowelsg7@bzybee.com Thu Jan 24 17:40:55 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIAkh-0007nQ-TA for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:40:55 -0500 Received: from [87.109.52.45] (helo=[87.109.52.45]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIAkg-0005py-Ew for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 17:40:55 -0500 Received: from [87.109.52.45] by smtp.secureserver.net; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 01:40:52 +0300 From: "Judy Chu" To: Subject: SandyBiggishCock Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 01:40:52 +0300 Message-ID: <01c85ef3$51a6aa00$2d346d57@vowelsg7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.1830 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 DickQueen-sizeRosalind http://www.grayskues.com From rituali531@friendsofindia.net Thu Jan 24 19:36:02 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JICY5-0007g9-Vk for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:36:02 -0500 Received: from [221.239.121.179] (helo=[221.239.121.179]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JICY4-0001Fk-Ni for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 19:36:01 -0500 Received: from [221.239.121.179] by mx01.1and1.com; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:36:00 +0800 From: "Valeria Cullen" To: Subject: TitanicPhallusJane Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:36:00 +0800 Message-ID: <01c85f2d$4ff9d800$b379efdd@rituali531> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2905 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.7 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 TitanicPhallusCornelius http://www.grayskues.com From noncompetitivenhqg31@sbsit.net Thu Jan 24 20:35:13 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIDTN-00079S-QX for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:35:13 -0500 Received: from [202.96.25.110] (helo=[202.96.25.110]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIDTM-0002l7-F3 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:35:13 -0500 Received: from [202.96.25.110] by mail-incoming2.gate.com; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:35:11 +0800 From: "Dominique Connolly" To: Subject: PenisImpressiveErich Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:35:11 +0800 Message-ID: <01c85f35$94897180$6e1960ca@noncompetitivenhqg31> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.7 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 AmandaProdigiousCock http://www.grayskues.com From DinotornadoValenzuela@freedict.com Thu Jan 24 21:11:50 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIE2o-0004ir-Av; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:11:50 -0500 Received: from [96.235.240.138] (helo=d17vlk61.myhome.westell.com) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIE2n-00043i-UP; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:11:50 -0500 Message-ID: <79d001c85ef7$a4550ef0$2e01a8c0@D17VLK61> From: "Gil Mayer" To: Subject: $5,000 to $500,000 or more Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:11:35 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_79CC_01C85EF7.A4550EF0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 2.8 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_79CC_01C85EF7.A4550EF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Your credit score does not matter to us! If you have your own business and require IMMEDIATE ready money to spend = ANY way you like or need Extra money to give your business a boost or = require A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here is our best deal = we can offer you NOW (hurry, this lot will expire TONIGHT): $28,000+ loan Hurry, when our deal is gone, it is gone. Simply complete this plain = form... Don't worry about approval, your your credit report will not disqualify = you! http://goodevibe.net.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_79CC_01C85EF7.A4550EF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Your credit doesn't = matter to=20 us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 need IMMEDIATE ready money to spend ANY way you like or need Extra money = to=20 give the company a boost or want A low interest loan - NO STRINGS = ATTACHED,=20 here is best deal we can offer you THIS EVENING (hurry, this tender will = expire=20 THIS EVENING):
=20
 
$60,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when the deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply complete this elementary form...
=20
 
Don't worry about = approval, your=20 credit history will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://goodevibe.net.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_79CC_01C85EF7.A4550EF0-- From GertrudegayLocke@scag.com Thu Jan 24 23:46:14 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIGSE-0003kd-5K; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:46:14 -0500 Received: from [200.106.37.2] (helo=jose834453d35a) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIGSD-0008EK-O6; Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:46:14 -0500 Message-ID: <790501c85f0c$f780aa70$2101a8c0@jose834453d35a> From: "Wilma Lam" To: Subject: Would you like a professional answer to debt? Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 23:44:14 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_7901_01C85F0C.F780AA70" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spam-Score: 2.0 (++) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_7901_01C85F0C.F780AA70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Join the Thousands of Americans GETTING OUT OF DEBT! Be DEBT FREE in as little as 12 MONTHS. Please visit the link below and get a free debt consultation today. NO = OBLIGATION! http://goodbvive.net.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_7901_01C85F0C.F780AA70 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Join the Thousands of = Americans GETTING=20 OUT OF DEBT!
 
Be DEBT FREE in as little = as 12=20 MONTHS.
 
Please visit the link = below and get a=20 free debt consultation today. NO OBLIGATION!
 
http://goodbvive.net.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_7901_01C85F0C.F780AA70-- From scullingw3@preventeq.com Fri Jan 25 02:05:32 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIId2-0005Qe-4B for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:05:32 -0500 Received: from [81.214.136.5] (helo=dsl.static812141365.ttnet.net.tr) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIId0-0003OZ-U0 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:05:32 -0500 Received: from [81.214.136.5] by mail.preventeq.com; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:05:30 +0200 From: "Antone Sandoval" To: Subject: WallopingPenisKathryn Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:05:30 +0200 Message-ID: <01c85f31$6efa6900$0588d651@scullingw3> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.3416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2869 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.7 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 BodypartColossalJoshua http://www.slopitues.com From teneipneunkw@actproductions.co.uk Fri Jan 25 12:47:13 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JISe0-0000CY-UJ for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:47:13 -0500 Received: from [90.151.28.28] (helo=[90.151.28.28]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JISe0-00071V-1k for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:47:12 -0500 Received: (qmail 40610 invoked from network); Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:47:12 +0500 Received: from unknown (HELO actproductions.co.uk) (180.191.253.240) by with SMTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:47:11 +0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ( [102.63.11.27]) by actproductions.co.uk (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id CLqFVwJz774219 for ; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:47:10 +0500 Message-Id: <076218463710.CLqFVwJz774219@308960.> Received: from phpmailer ([127.0.0.1]) by with HTTP; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:47:10 +0500 Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:47:10 +0500 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org From: "teneipne" Subject: teproces X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: phpmailer [version 1.54] Reply-To: teneipneunkw@actproductions.co.uk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset = "iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 http://mytostrut.com/ Men & Women Designer Footwear from Chanel Gucci Prada Dior Versace From akstcanacondalimomnsdgs@anacondalimo.com Fri Jan 25 20:14:48 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIZdA-00081i-7i; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:14:48 -0500 Received: from dc5147d2c5.adsl.wanadoo.nl ([81.71.210.197]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JIZd9-0006wC-0X; Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:14:48 -0500 Received: from [81.71.210.197] by anacondalimo.com; Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:24:56 +0100 From: "Corrine Morrow" To: Subject: Dont forget about Valentines Day Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:24:56 +0100 Message-ID: <01c85fc2$a402cc00$c5d24751@akstcanacondalimomnsdgs> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1158 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.4 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 Looking at buying your loved_one a beautiful gift for Valentines Day We have over 5000 Replicaproducts in stock at discounted prices we use EMS shipping to make sure your order arrives fast and on time! http://korstifun.com From akstcalisochiromnsdgs@alisochiro.com Sat Jan 26 10:01:52 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JImXY-0001hr-Hz; Sat, 26 Jan 2008 10:01:52 -0500 Received: from [89.44.125.163] (helo=alexx-7nah5rgh7) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JImXX-00059w-Hz; Sat, 26 Jan 2008 10:01:52 -0500 Received: from [89.44.125.163] by alisochiro.com; Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:12:04 +0200 Message-ID: <01c8603e$92f02670$a37d2c59@akstcalisochiromnsdgs> From: "Derick Platt" To: Subject: Re: lose school recess Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 17:12:04 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Our Med Prices are unbeatable Have a look and start to save now http://thechristianear.com From kreisel@starwarsroadtrips.com Sun Jan 27 11:37:29 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJAVd-0002nF-Mc; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:37:29 -0500 Received: from [85.99.205.54] (helo=dsl.dynamic859920554.ttnet.net.tr) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJAVc-0006S0-BO; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 11:37:29 -0500 Received: from [85.99.205.54] by mx2.balanced.postal.mail.dreamhost.com; , 27 Jan 2008 18:35:56 +0200 Message-ID: <01c86113$74170e00$36cd6355@kreisel> From: "Dorothea Singh" To: Subject: Floodlight , 27 Jan 2008 18:35:56 +0200 Date: , 27 Jan 2008 18:35:56 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1250"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 X-Spam-Score: 3.7 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db Every Med we stock is onsale today See our special prices at http://thehungryear.com From evenminykp@SEOIL.AC.KR Sun Jan 27 14:45:24 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJDRU-0002qr-RS for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:45:24 -0500 Received: from [80.51.225.2] (helo=gnc58.internetdsl.tpnet.pl) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJDRU-0003bg-7v for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:45:24 -0500 Received: (qmail 22376 invoked from network); Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:45:25 +0100 Received: from unknown (HELO SEOIL.AC.KR) (77.91.29.117) by with SMTP; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:45:24 +0100 Received: from localhost.localdomain ( [38.217.138.221]) by SEOIL.AC.KR (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id oJCGTkpd010678 for ; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:45:23 +0100 Message-Id: <604858426108.oJCGTkpd010678@184555.> Received: from phpmailer ([127.0.0.1]) by with HTTP; Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:45:23 +0100 Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 20:45:23 +0100 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org From: "evenmin" Subject: everdien X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: phpmailer [version 1.54] Reply-To: evenminykp@SEOIL.AC.KR MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset = "iso-8859-1" X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080127-1, 2008-01-27), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 http://www.proliut.com/ Making love feels great when you ave a 9 inch willy. From akstcadreanimnsdgs@adreani.com Mon Jan 28 02:02:50 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJO14-0007XR-59; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:02:50 -0500 Received: from [61.187.104.111] (helo=billgates) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJO12-0002D2-Vi; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 02:02:49 -0500 Received: from [61.187.104.111] by alt2.aspmx.l.google.com; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:13:13 +0800 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:13:13 +0800 From: "Tracey Scruggs" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.00.9) Business Reply-To: akstcadreanimnsdgs@adreani.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <542901917.89279627213884@adreani.com> To: sbtest@lists.ietf.org Subject: Re: it's chasing butterflies, playing with MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 01485d64dfa90b45a74269b3ca9d5574 ShippingInfoAddtoCart http://ghqeao.olowingre.net/?23305935 From klahr@magnumserv.com Mon Jan 28 04:50:41 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJQdV-0007qi-Nq; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 04:50:41 -0500 Received: from [81.3.168.96] (helo=[81.3.168.96]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJQdU-0006fS-Em; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 04:50:41 -0500 Received: from [81.3.168.96] by ismtp.wyoming.everyone.net; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:49:11 +0300 Message-ID: <01c861ac$2dc1bd80$60a80351@klahr> From: "Roslyn Wall" To: Subject: Nail Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:49:11 +0300 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 12:49:11 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.71.1712.3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3 X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8ac499381112328dd60aea5b1ff596ea Every Med we stock is onsale today See our special prices at http://chbunj.ballsharpl.info/?76518683 From cinesyrhkwtz@akademie-fuer-publizistik.de Mon Jan 28 07:31:32 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJT9A-000891-J0 for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:31:32 -0500 Received: from host100-73-dynamic.1-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([79.1.73.100]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJT99-0002Bd-Rg for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:31:32 -0500 Received: (qmail 9949 invoked from network); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:31:33 +0100 Received: from unknown (HELO akademie-fuer-publizistik.de) (43.166.172.81) by with SMTP; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:31:32 +0100 Received: from localhost.localdomain ( [189.39.94.145]) by akademie-fuer-publizistik.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with SMTP id xxKpHFiQ692603 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:31:31 +0100 Message-Id: <906603466287.xxKpHFiQ692603@402286.> Received: from phpmailer ([127.0.0.1]) by with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:31:31 +0100 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:31:31 +0100 To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org From: "cinesyrh" Subject: citidop X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: phpmailer [version 1.54] Reply-To: cinesyrhkwtz@akademie-fuer-publizistik.de MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset = "iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 http://vollul.com/ 9 inches is the perfect length, make sure you can achieve that From pkalous@centroeditorial.com Mon Jan 28 10:19:22 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJVla-0001vN-IM; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:19:22 -0500 Received: from [80.233.225.194] (helo=[80.233.225.194]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJVlZ-0006Y7-CK; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:19:22 -0500 Received: from [80.233.225.194] by smtp.secureserver.net; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:17:51 +0200 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:17:51 +0200 From: "Ester Ventura" X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.11) Educational Reply-To: pkalous@centroeditorial.com X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <726777593.87939362955272@centroeditorial.com> To: sigtran-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Rainbow Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:17:51 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 2870a44b67ee17965ce5ad0177e150f4 Every Med we stock is onsale today See our special prices at http://lerashower.com From RhondascuffleKrause@thoughtequity.com Mon Jan 28 10:26:11 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJVsB-0000hO-QC; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:26:11 -0500 Received: from bzq-84-109-2-200.red.bezeqint.net ([84.109.2.200] helo=nbf8efbb32ce03) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJVsA-0006ne-TY; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:26:11 -0500 Message-ID: <5f8901c86215$bcd17ce0$c8026d54@nbf8efbb32ce03> From: "Emma Maloney" To: Subject: Great Solution for seasonal merchants Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:24:29 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_5F85_01C86215.BCD17CE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2869 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962 X-Spam-Score: 4.2 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_5F85_01C86215.BCD17CE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Your credit does not matter to us! If you have your own business and want IMMEDIATE cash to spend ANY way = you like or want Extra money to give your business a boost or wish A low = interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here is our best deal we can offer = you TONIGHT (hurry, this tender will expire TONIGHT): $44,000+ loan Hurry, when the deal is gone, it is gone. Simply complete this easy = form... Do not worry about approval, your credit score will not disqualify you! http://hitethis.com.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_5F85_01C86215.BCD17CE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Your your credit = report does not=20 matter to us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 want IMMEDIATE money to spend ANY way you like or need Extra money to = give your=20 company a boost or require A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, = here is=20 best deal we can offer you NOW (hurry, this deal will expire=20 TODAY):
=20
 
$46,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when our deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply complete this simple form...
=20
 
Don't worry about = approval, your=20 credit score will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://hitethis.com.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_5F85_01C86215.BCD17CE0-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 28 11:54:03 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJXF2-00048U-Bh; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:53:52 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJXF1-000488-BP for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:53:51 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJXF1-000480-1q for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:53:51 -0500 Received: from violet.upc.es ([147.83.2.51]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJXEz-00053q-BT for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:53:51 -0500 Received: from entelserver.upc.edu (entelserver.upc.es [147.83.39.4]) by violet.upc.es (8.14.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0SGrm2s017304 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:53:48 +0100 Received: from [147.83.47.151] (c5s102-151.upc.es [147.83.47.151]) by entelserver.upc.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6C5B2CBCF2 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:53:42 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <479E0908.9040601@entel.upc.es> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:55:36 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Victoria_Beltr=E1n_Mart=EDnez?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed X-Mail-Scanned: Criba 2.0 + Clamd X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (violet.upc.es [147.83.2.51]); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 17:53:48 +0100 (CET) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by violet.upc.es id m0SGrm2s017304 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 Subject: [Simple] full-state RLMI documents after resubscriptions (RFC 4662) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I would be pleased to receive any clarification about an issue=20 originated in a discussion about the draft=20 "draft-ietf-simple-interdomain-scaling-analysis-03": In section 4.5 of RFC 4662 the sentence "Immediate notifications=20 triggered as a result of subsequent SUBSCRIBE messages SHOULD include an=20 RLMI document in which the full state is indicated" indicates that=20 sending full-state documents after resubscriptions is only a=20 recommendation (not a requirement). However, in section 5.2 of the same=20 RFC the sentence "The first NOTIFY sent in a subscription MUST contain=20 full state, as must the first NOTIFY sent after receipt of a SUBSCRIBE=20 request for the subscription" indicates that full-state documents are=20 required after the receipt of any SUBSCRIBE message (for both the=20 initial subscription and resubscriptions). I think that these two=20 sentences are a bit contradictory. Must the Resource List Server send a=20 full-state RLMI document when it receives a subsequent (not inital)=20 SUBSCRIBE message? Thanks in advance, Victoria Beltr=E1n _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 28 13:40:42 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJYuM-00089c-4m; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:40:38 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJYuI-000895-9t for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:40:34 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJYuH-00088r-5r; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:40:33 -0500 Received: from ns3.neustar.com ([156.154.24.138]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJYuG-000530-Pu; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:40:33 -0500 Received: from stiedprstage1.ietf.org (stiedprstage1.va.neustar.com [10.31.47.10]) by ns3.neustar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7239F175C9; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:40:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ietf by stiedprstage1.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJYtm-0002eR-0I; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:40:02 -0500 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:40:02 -0500 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3002fc2e661cd7f114cb6bae92fe88f1 Cc: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] I-D Action:draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : Multi-party Instant Message (IM) Sessions Using the Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) Author(s) : A. Niemi, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt Pages : 28 Date : 2008-01-28 The Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) defines a mechanism for sending instant messages within a peer-to-peer session, negotiated using the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and the Session Description Protocol (SDP). This document defines the necessary tools for establishing multi-party instant messaging (IM) sessions, or chat rooms, with MSRP. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-01-28133354.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-01-28133354.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --NextPart-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 28 13:51:53 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ5D-00074w-St; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:51:51 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ5B-00074W-T8 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:51:49 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ5B-00074O-Hd for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:51:49 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ5A-0005RJ-Sf for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:51:49 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0SIpe9g023727 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:51:47 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:43:00 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:42:59 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161DE19@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted Thread-Index: AchccEdQ/8SVwoU3QSybv2KexrKHrg== From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Jan 2008 18:43:00.0194 (UTC) FILETIME=[9B57AC20:01C861DD] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b Subject: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org The new version tries to encapsulate the recent discussions from the list about nicknames and consistent routing of messages. It doesn't try to resolve all open issues, but suggest a general direction for the way forward. =20 Change log: 1. Removed the Nickname URI. 2. The "Sending and Receiving Instant Messages" section no longer has references to nicknames. 3. Changed the order of things as internal dependencies changed 4. Added a Nickname Provider URI which provides unambiguous scope for the nickname. 5. The focus has to provide a single routable anonymous address called a Replacement URI if privacy is requested by a participant when joining.=20 6. Sending private messages are now limited to a single participant. 7. Removed the Siderbar section 8. Removed the section "Nicknames and Multiple SIP Addresses of Record" as the nickname URI can't collide with SIP AOR's any more. 9. Added a 428 response code to REPORT request for "Private messages not supported by recipient" feedback. 10. Removed the section "Mapping Nicknames to Other identities" The most radical change not discussed on the list is the removal of sidebars. Supporting it will require some quite more semantics in the MSRP mixer, and I wanted to know if the general direction is ok before going down that path. OTOH, there are multiple reasons for keeping it this way. Firstly avoid making the composition complex when forwarding messages having a multitude of replacement and participant URIs. It could prove error prone having anonymous URIs reviled unintentionally. Secondly it is now possible to detect if a single recipient is not able to receive private messages, and it can be rendered at the senders UI. Thirdly we avoid having two different ways of doing sidebars when XCON is in place. If there is interest in having sidebar support in this memo, and I can add extra semantics for this in next version of the draft. =20 Thanks, Geir Arne _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 28 13:54:02 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ7G-00030A-T5; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:53:58 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ7G-000305-Ik for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:53:58 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ7G-0002zx-8v for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:53:58 -0500 Received: from dizzyd.com ([207.210.219.225]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJZ7F-00081H-Pw for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:53:58 -0500 Received: from wrk225.corp.jabber.com (dencfw1.jabber.com [207.182.164.5]) (Authenticated sender: stpeter) by dizzyd.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F3F74005D for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:53:57 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <479E24C3.7090907@stpeter.im> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:53:55 -0700 From: Peter Saint-Andre User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; PPC Mac OS X Mach-O; en-US; rv:1.8.1.9) Gecko/20071031 Thunderbird/2.0.0.9 Mnenhy/0.7.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Simple] I-D Action:draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt References: In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 33cc095b503da4365ce57c727e553cf1 X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0886625770==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --===============0886625770== Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/x-pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms090300020501060904030202" This is a cryptographically signed message in MIME format. --------------ms090300020501060904030202 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: > Title : Multi-party Instant Message (IM) Sessions Using the > Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) > Author(s) : A. Niemi, et al. > Filename : draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt I think it might be helpful for everyone in the real-time communications space (or at least us IETFers) to settle on terminology for one-to-one text chat vs. multi-user text chat. For many years, those of us in the Jabber/XMPP community have called multi-user text chat "groupchat" and have reserved the word "chat" for one-to-one text chat. Some people in the RTC space also call multi-user text chat "text conferencing", on the model of voice chat (one-to-one) vs. voice conferencing or video chat vs. video conferencing. Also, draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-chat discusses interworking between SIP and XMPP for one-to-one chat (via MSRP), and the authors of that spec plan to write draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-groupchat (interworking for multi-user chat). It would be good to have consistent terminology for such functionality. Just a thought. :) Peter -- Peter Saint-Andre https://stpeter.im/ --------------ms090300020501060904030202 Content-Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature; name="smime.p7s" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="smime.p7s" Content-Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature MIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAqCAMIACAQExCzAJBgUrDgMCGgUAMIAGCSqGSIb3DQEHAQAAoIIYQDCC B3AwggbZoAMCAQICAQowDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEEBQAwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQI EwZJc3JhZWwxDjAMBgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYD VQQLExFDQSBBdXRob3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlv biBBdXRob3JpdHkxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAeFw0wNTA0 MDUxNDUyMTNaFw0xMDA0MDQxNDUyMTNaMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNy YWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNh dGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZy ZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBAPEaOcSx5ZNexwo1zJNcX48UV0UtkNtWX3qa9ZaX2VZilgIz eIrObloQV0Ma2rdgqosW9xMb5u3lBVIumt7fEwgMqqtDa3F2Qudelv93P9z2nbmn7X4GnCKA IQcW97KOSgQQHaVPHq03xGFbszx+LOKrBi/xv3bcGxtYrH+10M1nHbCRo8U2+zcJQowxoI+O U5nhko9vU25Jp8ZQ2fROH6C2TSjZuanzMTyvc5+dJiN2Hm2MhAMrqO7pUGhDKuUvnmKpAcwj eYQHU51mvlB4IId+4bTEwVoG4AMJ8RXB47VdJevN0yqeJSACyoRft4w4OpqFysR1HTT6aE6u xLg9ZC0CAwEAAaOCBBMwggQPMA8GA1UdEwEB/wQFMAMBAf8wCwYDVR0PBAQDAgHmMB0GA1Ud DgQWBBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZCDCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQcicOWzL3+MtUNjIEx tpidjShkjaGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UE BxMFRWlsYXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0 eSBEZXAuMSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8G CSqGSIb3DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEAMB0GA1UdEQQWMBSBEmFkbWluQHN0 YXJ0Y29tLm9yZzAdBgNVHRIEFjAUgRJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwYgYDVR0fBFswWTAp oCegJYYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NhLWNybC5jcmwwLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6 Ly9jcmwuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NybC9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMIIBSgYDVR0gBIIBQTCCAT0wggE5 BgsrBgEEAYG1NwEBATCCASgwLwYIKwYBBQUHAgEWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y Zy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvaW50 ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjCBvQYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgbAwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGX TGltaXRlZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25z KiBvZiB0aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkgUG9saWN5IGF2YWls YWJsZSBhdCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjARBglghkgBhvhC AQEEBAMCAAcwUAYJYIZIAYb4QgENBEMWQVN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBJbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUgRnJlZSBTU0wgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGVzMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBBAQlFiNo dHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY2EtY3JsLmNybDAzBglghkgBhvhCAQMEJhYkaHR0 cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2NydC1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRw Oi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQQFAAOBgQBc1g6H yT3ZrGb0Kq+kkqetnSXtcwffHEr6Tia2XqCqPLLzdZ8VTxVjeq/Kpg2u+8cGASIl1U45XmWa v4Vez+jSSnChRHwidmbwjCtNBFxr4C/Nkgs8wk2zNQbh+zlDKNophJT7+DVOhnIMJzdNkQW0 4STurMCFwLoyx5k1rDHQYTCCCGIwggdKoAMCAQICAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQUFADCBrzEL MAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEj MCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29t IENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBz dGFydGNvbS5vcmcwHhcNMDcwODIyMjExMzI3WhcNMDgwODIxMjExMzI3WjCBujELMAkGA1UE BhMCVVMxETAPBgNVBAgTCENvbG9yYWRvMQ8wDQYDVQQHEwZEZW52ZXIxGjAYBgNVBAoTEVBl dGVyIFNhaW50LUFuZHJlMSwwKgYDVQQLEyNTdGFydENvbSBUcnVzdGVkIENlcnRpZmljYXRl IE1lbWJlcjEaMBgGA1UEAxMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQtQW5kcmUxITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEnN0 cGV0ZXJAc3RwZXRlci5pbTCCASIwDQYJKoZIhvcNAQEBBQADggEPADCCAQoCggEBALC1dkqD gghuvUCkEloRDX50TTJ6Szj1BqtMpYq+An66BwkWfP07uay+jHori77776wk1/Ajk1nTSHX+ JWo+JWwVXYWBX+Zd780bB0FGShYlHGwMhd/pxX9sT4KW3D+r8sIHVbTGdudSweuNdBhqr1iE cjze75hpywMkk1OQhTkseQxI5owa9M31JOdNEX0Ja6esyhwwtqqTNC86OujXwa2wew8GTRJE 9p2I0B1VCsKuJaPatbIcf9OFiTSODb5vyoq3+lrElh6V6BXKxEfQ4D2HCSY+5UmlKdnltzvN bqxyaTYQi1YGsFzew7ST3R8P5jrCq2cvRjGrTKVojZXgPZ0CAwEAAaOCBHgwggR0MAwGA1Ud EwQFMAMCAQAwCwYDVR0PBAQDAgSwMB0GA1UdJQQWMBQGCCsGAQUFBwMCBggrBgEFBQcDBDAd BgNVHQ4EFgQUl7CU2dS/alOwLIHV/Oc2RkGDYugwgd0GA1UdIwSB1TCB0oAUBKzbJHdTRkaW XxcBXH1CR71IGQihgbakgbMwgbAxCzAJBgNVBAYTAklMMQ8wDQYDVQQIEwZJc3JhZWwxDjAM BgNVBAcTBUVpbGF0MRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMRowGAYDVQQLExFDQSBBdXRo b3JpdHkgRGVwLjEpMCcGA1UEAxMgRnJlZSBTU0wgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBBdXRob3JpdHkx ITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZ4IBCjCCAUAGA1UdIASCATcwggEz MIIBLwYLKwYBBAGBtTcBAQQwggEeMDUGCCsGAQUFBwIBFilodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvaW50ZXJtZWRpYXRlLnBkZjAvBggrBgEFBQcCARYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwgbMGCCsGAQUFBwICMIGmMBQWDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4wAwIB ARqBjUxpbWl0ZWQgTGlhYmlsaXR5LCByZWFkIHRoZSBzZWN0aW9uICpMZWdhbCBMaW1pdGF0 aW9ucyogb2YgdGhlIFN0YXJ0Q29tIENlcnRpZmljYXRpb24gUG9saWN5IGF2YWlsYWJsZSBh dCBodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9saWN5LnBkZjBkBgNVHR8EXTBbMCygKqAo hiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAroCmgJ4YlaHR0cDov L2NybC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDCBhAYIKwYBBQUHAQEEeDB2MDcGCCsG AQUFBzABhitodHRwOi8vb2NzcC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViL2NsYXNzMy91c2VyL2NhMDsG CCsGAQUFBzAChi9odHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvc3ViLmNsYXNzMy51c2VyLmNh LmNydDARBglghkgBhvhCAQEEBAMCBaAwMQYJYIZIAYb4QgENBCQWIlN0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0 ZWQgRW1haWwgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUwMgYJYIZIAYb4QgEEBCUWI2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jYS1jcmwuY3JsMDUGCWCGSAGG+EIBAwQoFiZodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNv bS5vcmcvY3J0dTMtY3JsLmNybDAyBglghkgBhvhCAQgEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRj b20ub3JnL3BvbGljeS5wZGYwIwYDVR0SBBwwGoYYaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3Jn MA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAA4IBAQCdG1L0T4OT1x4X/cKsuHxgijRaZGGiVECcn5+1X7E3H54/ yDkUqWAp6MZ3hZm36pzTYYnl+5M6vldLcqFCVpD7MgH6Kmu+r6pXAjU33k1RIHnkBvQ6KGlR p0RjfaZW/2MkG07vF2QTLbx6KIhi0pa9Bg9wlqyw+C2g6FYnfmrdJLgGrxUXek8DSZNjZ/AA 75OoutrWkBtdaL2TbFiawdbGuJbSoQLHqLrNhT8f74Oec7ReOmuUTEL8hsFU0sbY/n2e9Wna 1Vzze3nZPbyPiC5F88p88gVLB9mKkOzleYefYiQw8LABz5x1MI+w0bNKNPLviJ/KnHGFEfVL z1oMHyC3MIIIYjCCB0qgAwIBAgIDAXiqMA0GCSqGSIb3DQEBBQUAMIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJ TDEPMA0GA1UECBMGSXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpT ZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQ cmltYXJ5IEVtYWlsIEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9y ZzAeFw0wNzA4MjIyMTEzMjdaFw0wODA4MjEyMTEzMjdaMIG6MQswCQYDVQQGEwJVUzERMA8G A1UECBMIQ29sb3JhZG8xDzANBgNVBAcTBkRlbnZlcjEaMBgGA1UEChMRUGV0ZXIgU2FpbnQt QW5kcmUxLDAqBgNVBAsTI1N0YXJ0Q29tIFRydXN0ZWQgQ2VydGlmaWNhdGUgTWVtYmVyMRow GAYDVQQDExFQZXRlciBTYWludC1BbmRyZTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3DQEJARYSc3RwZXRlckBzdHBl dGVyLmltMIIBIjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAAOCAQ8AMIIBCgKCAQEAsLV2SoOCCG69QKQSWhEN fnRNMnpLOPUGq0ylir4CfroHCRZ8/Tu5rL6MeiuLvvvvrCTX8COTWdNIdf4laj4lbBVdhYFf 5l3vzRsHQUZKFiUcbAyF3+nFf2xPgpbcP6vywgdVtMZ251LB6410GGqvWIRyPN7vmGnLAyST U5CFOSx5DEjmjBr0zfUk500RfQlrp6zKHDC2qpM0Lzo66NfBrbB7DwZNEkT2nYjQHVUKwq4l o9q1shx/04WJNI4Nvm/Kirf6WsSWHpXoFcrER9DgPYcJJj7lSaUp2eW3O81urHJpNhCLVgaw XN7DtJPdHw/mOsKrZy9GMatMpWiNleA9nQIDAQABo4IEeDCCBHQwDAYDVR0TBAUwAwIBADAL BgNVHQ8EBAMCBLAwHQYDVR0lBBYwFAYIKwYBBQUHAwIGCCsGAQUFBwMEMB0GA1UdDgQWBBSX sJTZ1L9qU7AsgdX85zZGQYNi6DCB3QYDVR0jBIHVMIHSgBQErNskd1NGRpZfFwFcfUJHvUgZ CKGBtqSBszCBsDELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEOMAwGA1UEBxMFRWls YXQxFjAUBgNVBAoTDVN0YXJ0Q29tIEx0ZC4xGjAYBgNVBAsTEUNBIEF1dGhvcml0eSBEZXAu MSkwJwYDVQQDEyBGcmVlIFNTTCBDZXJ0aWZpY2F0aW9uIEF1dGhvcml0eTEhMB8GCSqGSIb3 DQEJARYSYWRtaW5Ac3RhcnRjb20ub3JnggEKMIIBQAYDVR0gBIIBNzCCATMwggEvBgsrBgEE AYG1NwEBBDCCAR4wNQYIKwYBBQUHAgEWKWh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9pbnRl cm1lZGlhdGUucGRmMC8GCCsGAQUFBwIBFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjCBswYIKwYBBQUHAgIwgaYwFBYNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjADAgEBGoGNTGltaXRl ZCBMaWFiaWxpdHksIHJlYWQgdGhlIHNlY3Rpb24gKkxlZ2FsIExpbWl0YXRpb25zKiBvZiB0 aGUgU3RhcnRDb20gQ2VydGlmaWNhdGlvbiBQb2xpY3kgYXZhaWxhYmxlIGF0IGh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9wb2xpY3kucGRmMGQGA1UdHwRdMFswLKAqoCiGJmh0dHA6Ly9j ZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMCugKaAnhiVodHRwOi8vY3JsLnN0YXJ0 Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1My1jcmwuY3JsMIGEBggrBgEFBQcBAQR4MHYwNwYIKwYBBQUHMAGGK2h0 dHA6Ly9vY3NwLnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIvY2xhc3MzL3VzZXIvY2EwOwYIKwYBBQUHMAKG L2h0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9zdWIuY2xhc3MzLnVzZXIuY2EuY3J0MBEGCWCG SAGG+EIBAQQEAwIFoDAxBglghkgBhvhCAQ0EJBYiU3RhcnRDb20gVHJ1c3RlZCBFbWFpbCBD ZXJ0aWZpY2F0ZTAyBglghkgBhvhCAQQEJRYjaHR0cDovL2NlcnQuc3RhcnRjb20ub3JnL2Nh LWNybC5jcmwwNQYJYIZIAYb4QgEDBCgWJmh0dHA6Ly9jZXJ0LnN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZy9jcnR1 My1jcmwuY3JsMDIGCWCGSAGG+EIBCAQlFiNodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcvcG9s aWN5LnBkZjAjBgNVHRIEHDAahhhodHRwOi8vY2VydC5zdGFydGNvbS5vcmcwDQYJKoZIhvcN AQEFBQADggEBAJ0bUvRPg5PXHhf9wqy4fGCKNFpkYaJUQJyfn7VfsTcfnj/IORSpYCnoxneF mbfqnNNhieX7kzq+V0tyoUJWkPsyAfoqa76vqlcCNTfeTVEgeeQG9DooaVGnRGN9plb/YyQb Tu8XZBMtvHooiGLSlr0GD3CWrLD4LaDoVid+at0kuAavFRd6TwNJk2Nn8ADvk6i62taQG11o vZNsWJrB1sa4ltKhAseous2FPx/vg55ztF46a5RMQvyGwVTSxtj+fZ71adrVXPN7edk9vI+I LkXzynzyBUsH2YqQ7OV5h59iJDDwsAHPnHUwj7DRs0o08u+In8qccYUR9UvPWgwfILcxggQs MIIEKAIBATCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQGA1UEChMN U3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25pbmcxLzAt BgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEwHwYJKoZI hvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjAJBgUrDgMCGgUAoIICSTAYBgkqhkiG 9w0BCQMxCwYJKoZIhvcNAQcBMBwGCSqGSIb3DQEJBTEPFw0wODAxMjgxODUzNTVaMCMGCSqG SIb3DQEJBDEWBBSlRwvumB4Nns+PGRlnT36tdSRyjTBSBgkqhkiG9w0BCQ8xRTBDMAoGCCqG SIb3DQMHMA4GCCqGSIb3DQMCAgIAgDANBggqhkiG9w0DAgIBQDAHBgUrDgMCBzANBggqhkiG 9w0DAgIBKDCByAYJKwYBBAGCNxAEMYG6MIG3MIGvMQswCQYDVQQGEwJJTDEPMA0GA1UECBMG SXNyYWVsMRYwFAYDVQQKEw1TdGFydENvbSBMdGQuMSMwIQYDVQQLExpTZWN1cmUgQ2VydGlm aWNhdGUgU2lnbmluZzEvMC0GA1UEAxMmU3RhcnRDb20gQ2xhc3MgMyBQcmltYXJ5IEVtYWls IEZyZWUgQ0ExITAfBgkqhkiG9w0BCQEWEmFkbWluQHN0YXJ0Y29tLm9yZwIDAXiqMIHKBgsq hkiG9w0BCRACCzGBuqCBtzCBrzELMAkGA1UEBhMCSUwxDzANBgNVBAgTBklzcmFlbDEWMBQG A1UEChMNU3RhcnRDb20gTHRkLjEjMCEGA1UECxMaU2VjdXJlIENlcnRpZmljYXRlIFNpZ25p bmcxLzAtBgNVBAMTJlN0YXJ0Q29tIENsYXNzIDMgUHJpbWFyeSBFbWFpbCBGcmVlIENBMSEw HwYJKoZIhvcNAQkBFhJhZG1pbkBzdGFydGNvbS5vcmcCAwF4qjANBgkqhkiG9w0BAQEFAASC AQBvK8TKfeMXv6M5+BcN5FdDqCItf8eHzd8XDhhvDwBmot/GFnz3pIG1rDleo1dqAtajHQUo itus+UljTFOFmlB04eQKZUitYpppRC86HV7iPdzUyZXCLAFQqDuMWFDvz9aE9Xk5Z9+hL28d nbn7J2q4ZETh44/sS8zzldhAViKLhBVCPYNSy2Y0rb2b4H54q9thaA9xWifC67/5Eyv6Hj20 3gMhCdvXR754QDIh9RsrzQfDC564YiBTS6hr71HlrVA9IksIvxBZ92On5ElvKcOGNpJMgTvR 3+TmYVpgiCogGcX/SXijR7/Na+l4S5IwcTq+3v7MrYQf2Z9vaCr97R6CAAAAAAAA --------------ms090300020501060904030202-- --===============0886625770== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============0886625770==-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jan 28 16:03:29 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJb8U-0000zj-KJ; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:03:22 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJb8T-0000w4-6y for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:03:21 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJb8S-0000uI-Qe for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:03:20 -0500 Received: from node05.dns-hosting.info ([85.17.186.5]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJb8R-00058x-0P for simple@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:03:20 -0500 Received: from 62-50-199-109.client.stsn.net ([62.50.199.109] helo=[192.168.66.102]) by node05.dns-hosting.info with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JJb8O-0004Wp-UT; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:03:17 +0100 Message-Id: <0C852C9B-9433-4BE5-BE2E-0B8FF6E62FC7@ag-projects.com> From: Adrian Georgescu To: simple@ietf.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v915) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:03:08 +0100 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.915) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 62.50.199.109 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ag@ag-projects.com X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on node05.dns-hosting.info X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00, DNS_FROM_RFC_BOGUSMX, HTML_MESSAGE, TVD_RCVD_IP autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:39:36 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on node05.dns-hosting.info) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 244a2fd369eaf00ce6820a760a3de2e8 Subject: [Simple] Open source implementation of MSRP Relay (RFC 4976) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0755300849==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org --===============0755300849== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-2--91310521 --Apple-Mail-2--91310521 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, We have implemented a MSRP relay based on the RFC 4976 specifications. The software is written in Python language and available under GPL license. The project software and its documentation is available at: http://msrprelay.org Many thanks to those that have made possible the execution and hopefully the success of this project: - NLNET Foundation - Ruud Klaver - Dan Pascu - Many of our IETF friends We appreciate any feedback about the software. If you use the software and want to contribute or provide feedback you may use the ticketing system provided on the website. Kind regards, Adrian Georgescu --Apple-Mail-2--91310521 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello,

We have implemented a MSRP = relay based on the RFC 4976 specifications. The software is written in = Python language and available under GPL license. 

The project software and = its documentation is available at:

Many thanks to those that = have made possible the execution and hopefully the success of this = project:

- = NLNET Foundation
- Ruud Klaver
- Dan = Pascu
- Many of our IETF friends

We appreciate any feedback = about the software.

If you use the software = and want to contribute or provide feedback you may use the ticketing = system provided on the website.

Kind = regards,
Adrian Georgescu

= --Apple-Mail-2--91310521-- --===============0755300849== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============0755300849==-- From akstcaccentonafricamnsdgs@accentonafrica.com Mon Jan 28 16:37:09 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJbfB-0001Ad-RG; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:37:09 -0500 Received: from cable-89-216-224-18.dynamic.sbb.co.yu ([89.216.224.18] helo=vlado-qvqtbxogc.sbb.co.yu) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJbfA-0004jL-QC; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:37:09 -0500 Received: from [89.216.224.18] by accentonafrica.com.inbound35.mxlogicmx.net; Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:47:38 +0100 Message-ID: <01c861ff$c837e440$12e0d859@akstcaccentonafricamnsdgs> From: "Nancy Dove" To: Subject: Re: academy committees for Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:47:38 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="us-ascii"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 X-Spam-Score: 4.3 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 BiggerOrgasms We can help http://hotingsk.com liquidation and are unregulated and At the same time, we will be provides a district if you want. At the same time, we your splits can be awarded follow and I have any possible to advice relating agency for China or myself in regard to had gone grant us the sloe is not obliged to it would be useful th hasn’t resolved is not obliged to services in China. are evaluating claims recommended by At the same time, we From akstcadamfinemnsdgs@adamfine.ca Tue Jan 29 05:15:56 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJnVU-0006dt-5S; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:15:56 -0500 Received: from [221.152.166.177] (helo=7qr7709ofrkfy3q.kornet) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJnVS-0000M3-Oc; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:15:55 -0500 Received: from [221.152.166.177] by adamfine.ca; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:26:27 +0900 Message-ID: <01c862ac$d78ce050$b1a698dd@akstcadamfinemnsdgs> From: "Carole Gunn" To: Subject: Re: skills, Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:26:27 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 X-Spam-Score: 2.3 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 30ac594df0e66ffa5a93eb4c48bcb014 MedsOnsaleToday DontMissOut http://knewthick.com district if you want. piece of accurate mind. However it must dividend preference history of corporation, complaint against the FSA. I have contacted various no powers at my may be somewhat it would be useful of clarity I think Having reviewed all the organisations you were informed recommended by I have tried to take anwhich you want about Having reviewed all any possible consequently not protected From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 29 06:01:59 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoDx-0002Bg-6i; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:01:53 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoDu-000285-FN for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:01:50 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoDu-00027Z-5Y for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:01:50 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoD3-0000io-0v for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:00:57 -0500 Received: from smtp02.telecomputing.se ([84.17.192.138]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoD2-0002z3-Ei for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:00:56 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:00:49 +0100 Message-ID: <180DEFC4530E0C4B91C6EA19A8192E49BFFD52@Z11AR1CE1VS1.z11.tconet.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: XCAP discovery question thread-index: AchiZjSxnnNIGKPRSFqQ0stKepcMfA== From: "Niklas Fondberg" To: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c2e58d9873012c90703822e287241385 X-TMDA-Confirmed: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:01:50 -0500 Subject: [Simple] XCAP discovery question X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1588819396==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1588819396== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C86266.85D1E10A" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C86266.85D1E10A Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello all. I have searched in OMA XDM, OMA IM-SIMPLE and OMA PRESENCE along with many rfc's for a preferred way to get the address of the XCAP server (XCAP root URI)... I hope this list is the right for asking questions like this, if not please excuse me. =20 First let me explain that I do not want to configure the client with more that the usual SIP configuration parameters like registration server, proxy, uri, proxy user, proxy pwd, registration pwd aso. Therefore I want to get the xcap resources (mainly for implementing an IM/Presence enabled address book) through rls-services -> resource-lists. =20 The ways I have found are: =20 By using the SUBSCRIBE mechanism in draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-07 and use the value of the xcap-root attribute from the tag. I do not think this is the intended way and I will end up with NOTIFY messages for the changes... =20 And from rfc4826 SUBSCRIBE (a bit unclear) like this:=20 =20 SUBSCRIBE sip:me@server.com SIP/2.0 Event: ua-profile;profile-type=3Dapplication;auid=3D"resource-lists"; Accept: application/resource-lists+xml =20 =20 If anybody knows of a good overview document (OMA is not very good at overview nor are rfc:s) about this, please share this. =20 =20 Kind regards, Niklas Fondberg =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C86266.85D1E10A Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello = all.

I have searched in = OMA XDM, OMA IM-SIMPLE and OMA PRESENCE along with many rfc’s for a = preferred way to get the address of the XCAP server (XCAP root = URI)…

I hope this list = is the right for asking questions like this, if not please excuse = me.

 

First let me = explain that I do not want to configure the client with more that the usual SIP = configuration parameters like registration server, proxy, uri, proxy user, proxy pwd, registration pwd aso.

Therefore I want = to get the xcap resources (mainly for implementing an IM/Presence enabled address book) = through rls-services -> resource-lists.

 

The ways I have = found are:

 

By using the = SUBSCRIBE mechanism in draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-07 and use the value of the = xcap-root attribute from the <xcap-diff> tag.

I do not think = this is the intended way and I will end up with NOTIFY messages for the = changes…

 

And from rfc4826 = SUBSCRIBE (a bit unclear) like this:

 

SUBSCRIBE = sip:me@server.com SIP/2.0

Event: ua-profile;profile-type=3Dapplication;auid=3D"resource-lists";<= o:p>

Accept: = application/resource-lists+xml

 

 

If = anybody knows of a good overview document (OMA is not very good at overview nor are rfc:s) = about this, please share this.

 

 

Kind = regards,

Niklas = Fondberg

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C86266.85D1E10A-- --===============1588819396== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============1588819396==-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 29 06:05:09 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoH5-0002qZ-TM; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:05:07 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoH2-0002qJ-TR for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:05:04 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoH2-0002qB-JP for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:05:04 -0500 Received: from smtp02.telecomputing.se ([84.17.192.138]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJoGz-0001Vb-M2 for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:05:04 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 12:04:55 +0100 Message-ID: <180DEFC4530E0C4B91C6EA19A8192E49BFFD5B@Z11AR1CE1VS1.z11.tconet.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: XCAP discovery question (clarification) thread-index: AchiZsfWKIh+k4G1SuKYuuNYOoMwFg== From: "Niklas Fondberg" To: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 681e62a2ce9b0804b459fe780d892beb Subject: [Simple] XCAP discovery question (clarification) X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0677361334==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============0677361334== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C86267.187C8A2D" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C86267.187C8A2D Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable (clarification of last port) Hello all. I have searched in OMA XDM, OMA IM-SIMPLE and OMA PRESENCE along with many rfc's for a preferred way to get the address of the XCAP server (XCAP root URI)... I hope this list is the right for asking questions like this, if not please excuse me. =20 First let me explain that I do not want to configure the client with more that the usual SIP configuration parameters like registration server, proxy, uri, proxy user, proxy pwd, registration pwd aso. Therefore I want to get the xcap resources (mainly for implementing an IM/Presence enabled address book) through rls-services -> resource-lists. =20 The ways I have found are: =20 By using the SUBSCRIBE mechanism in draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-07 and use the value of the xcap-root attribute from the tag. I do not think this is the intended way and I will end up with NOTIFY messages for the changes... =20 And from rfc4826 SUBSCRIBE (a bit unclear) like this:=20 =20 SUBSCRIBE sip:me@server.com SIP/2.0 Event: ua-profile;profile-type=3Dapplication;auid=3D"resource-lists"; Accept: application/resource-lists+xml =20 (clarification next line) If I'm correct the xml document will be returned in the NOTIFY and could contain the xcap uri tag. But this is only if there is a service, right? =20 If anybody knows of a good overview document (OMA is not very good at overview nor are rfc:s) about this, please share this. =20 =20 Kind regards, Niklas Fondberg =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C86267.187C8A2D Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

(clarification of = last port)

Hello = all.

I have searched in = OMA XDM, OMA IM-SIMPLE and OMA PRESENCE along with many rfc’s for a = preferred way to get the address of the XCAP server (XCAP root = URI)…

I hope this list = is the right for asking questions like this, if not please excuse = me.

 

First let me = explain that I do not want to configure the client with more that the usual SIP = configuration parameters like registration server, proxy, uri, proxy user, proxy pwd, registration pwd aso.

Therefore I want = to get the xcap resources (mainly for implementing an IM/Presence enabled address = book) through rls-services -> resource-lists.

 

The ways I have = found are:

 

By using the = SUBSCRIBE mechanism in draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-07 and use the value of the = xcap-root attribute from the <xcap-diff> tag.

I do not think = this is the intended way and I will end up with NOTIFY messages for the = changes…

 

And from rfc4826 = SUBSCRIBE (a bit unclear) like this:

 

SUBSCRIBE = sip:me@server.com SIP/2.0

Event: ua-profile;profile-type=3Dapplication;auid=3D"resource-lists";<= o:p>

Accept: = application/resource-lists+xml

 

(clarification next line)

If = I’m correct the <rls-services> xml document will be = returned in the NOTIFY and could contain the <resource-list>xcap uri tag. But = this is only if there is a service, right?

 

If = anybody knows of a good overview document (OMA is not very good at overview nor are rfc:s) = about this, please share this.

 

 

Kind = regards,

Niklas = Fondberg

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C86267.187C8A2D-- --===============0677361334== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============0677361334==-- From LauricourseLim@okaythursday.com Tue Jan 29 10:04:30 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJs0j-0002gZ-VM; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:04:30 -0500 Received: from [190.24.215.134] (helo=personal) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJs0j-00052g-6K; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:04:29 -0500 Message-ID: <3a3601c86288$3f572850$2400a8c0@personal> From: "Maryellen Lim" To: Subject: $5,000 to $500,000 or more Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:04:13 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_3A32_01C86288.3F572850" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 080128-0, 28/01/2008), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Score: 4.8 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: c0bedb65cce30976f0bf60a0a39edea4 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_3A32_01C86288.3F572850 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Your credit doesn't matter to us! If you have your own business and wish IMMEDIATE ready money to spend = ANY way you like or require Extra money to give the business a boost or = wish A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here is best deal we can = offer you TONIGHT (hurry, this deal will expire TONIGHT): $20,000+ loan Hurry, when our best deal is gone, it is gone. Simply finish this = simplified form... Don't worry about approval, your credit score will not disqualify you! http://bigtimesavef.net.cn/ ------=_NextPart_000_3A32_01C86288.3F572850 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20
Your credit doesn't = matter to=20 us!
=20
 
If you have your own = business and=20 need IMMEDIATE money to spend ANY way you like or want Extra money to = give the=20 company a boost or want A low interest loan - NO STRINGS ATTACHED, here = is our=20 deal we can offer you THIS NIGHT (hurry, this deal will expire THIS=20 NIGHT):
=20
 
$60,000+ = loan
 
Hurry, when our deal = is gone, it=20 is gone. Simply fill in this user-friendly form...
=
 
Do not worry about = approval, your=20 credit history will not disqualify you!
=20
 
http://bigtimesavef.net.cn/
------=_NextPart_000_3A32_01C86288.3F572850-- From richard@shreadkuyrkendall.com Tue Jan 29 10:25:36 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJsLA-0005Jn-Cb; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:25:36 -0500 Received: from 66-168-218-15.dhcp.mtgm.al.charter.com ([66.168.218.15] helo=your-c8bh3jaglt) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJsL9-0005it-Ea; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:25:36 -0500 Received: from [66.168.218.15] by pop.shreadkuyrkendall.com; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:24:05 -0800 From: "Kayla Ochoa" To: Subject: Vacuum Pendulum Rifle Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:24:05 -0800 Electricity Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:24:05 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 Thread-Index: Aca6QUKRQ0A5MK5A6X4EYAG2F3R651== X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.2300 Message-ID: <01c86247$eddaaaf0$0fdaa842@richard> X-Spam-Score: 3.5 (+++) X-Scan-Signature: 6d62ab47271805379d7172ee693a45db EveryRX OnsaleRIghtNow http://statehour.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 29 10:27:09 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJsMY-0000wK-4f; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:27:02 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJsMW-0000tB-6D for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:27:00 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJsMV-0000sv-SY for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:26:59 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com ([64.102.122.148]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJsMS-0002lJ-C9 for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:26:59 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,270,1199682000"; d="scan'208,217";a="84869134" Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2008 10:26:56 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0TFQutn009665; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:26:56 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0TFQhJJ024894; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:26:51 GMT Received: from xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.124]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:26:38 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: [Simple] XCAP discovery question (clarification) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:26:37 -0500 Message-ID: <5C5630E45267B642894988A97570D3221BD459@xmb-rtp-215.amer.cisco.com> In-Reply-To: <180DEFC4530E0C4B91C6EA19A8192E49BFFD5B@Z11AR1CE1VS1.z11.tconet.net> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] XCAP discovery question (clarification) Thread-Index: AchiZsfWKIh+k4G1SuKYuuNYOoMwFgAJC31Q From: "Sanjay Sinha (sanjsinh)" To: "Niklas Fondberg" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 29 Jan 2008 15:26:38.0875 (UTC) FILETIME=[578ACEB0:01C8628B] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=10319; t=1201620416; x=1202484416; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=sanjsinh@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22Sanjay=20Sinha=20(sanjsinh)=22=20 |Subject:=20RE=3A=20[Simple]=20XCAP=20discovery=20question= 20(clarification) |Sender:=20 |To:=20=22Niklas=20Fondberg=22=20,=20; bh=/ZETUhTeVMDjI4VYffGjzzMW/lC6BvFH1trR/bGXmJw=; b=WCLzkE4Iuu+CceTQSB165ovVPTWG7amHdn/0FjmR43gvQgxFyU8opcF1Cn dzSWxgLaP3Ke66XjutG2Te5E/OtFi2DxIptoR2eICxmsEO+lLWib8YEUcfPh LFY90OFeQ+; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=sanjsinh@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: -4.0 (----) X-Scan-Signature: be922d419820e291bde1362184dc32fd Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1841029035==" Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --===============1841029035== Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8628B.57512D24" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C8628B.57512D24 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This was discussed on sipping mailer: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping/current/msg08662.html =20 Idea was to use config framework to pass the uri to client. =20 Sanjay =20 ________________________________ From: Niklas Fondberg [mailto:niklas.fondberg@tilgin.com]=20 Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 6:05 AM To: simple@ietf.org Subject: [Simple] XCAP discovery question (clarification) =09 =09 (clarification of last port) Hello all. I have searched in OMA XDM, OMA IM-SIMPLE and OMA PRESENCE along with many rfc's for a preferred way to get the address of the XCAP server (XCAP root URI)... I hope this list is the right for asking questions like this, if not please excuse me. =20 First let me explain that I do not want to configure the client with more that the usual SIP configuration parameters like registration server, proxy, uri, proxy user, proxy pwd, registration pwd aso. Therefore I want to get the xcap resources (mainly for implementing an IM/Presence enabled address book) through rls-services -> resource-lists. =20 The ways I have found are: =20 By using the SUBSCRIBE mechanism in draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-07 and use the value of the xcap-root attribute from the tag. I do not think this is the intended way and I will end up with NOTIFY messages for the changes... =20 And from rfc4826 SUBSCRIBE (a bit unclear) like this:=20 =20 SUBSCRIBE sip:me@server.com SIP/2.0 Event: ua-profile;profile-type=3Dapplication;auid=3D"resource-lists"; Accept: application/resource-lists+xml =20 (clarification next line) If I'm correct the xml document will be returned in the NOTIFY and could contain the xcap uri tag. But this is only if there is a service, right? =20 If anybody knows of a good overview document (OMA is not very good at overview nor are rfc:s) about this, please share this. =20 =20 Kind regards, Niklas Fondberg =20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C8628B.57512D24 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
This was discussed on sipping mailer: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping/current/msg08662.html
 
Idea was to use config framework to pass the = uri to=20 client.
 
Sanjay
 

From: Niklas Fondberg=20 [mailto:niklas.fondberg@tilgin.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January = 29, 2008=20 6:05 AM
To: simple@ietf.org
Subject: [Simple] XCAP = discovery question (clarification)

(clarification of = last=20 port)

Hello=20 all.

I have searched = in OMA XDM,=20 OMA IM-SIMPLE and OMA PRESENCE along with many rfc’s for a = preferred way to=20 get the address of the XCAP server (XCAP root = URI)…

I hope this list = is the right=20 for asking questions like this, if not please excuse = me.

 

First let me = explain that I=20 do not want to configure the client with more that the usual SIP = configuration=20 parameters like registration server, proxy, uri, proxy user, proxy = pwd,=20 registration pwd aso.

Therefore I want = to get the=20 xcap resources (mainly for implementing an IM/Presence enabled address = book)=20 through rls-services -> resource-lists.

 

The ways I have = found=20 are:

 

By using the = SUBSCRIBE=20 mechanism in draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-07 and use the value of the = xcap-root=20 attribute from the <xcap-diff> tag.

I do not think = this is the=20 intended way and I will end up with NOTIFY messages for the=20 changes…

 

And from rfc4826 = SUBSCRIBE (a=20 bit unclear) like this:

 

SUBSCRIBE = sip:me@server.com SIP/2.0

Event:=20 = ua-profile;profile-type=3Dapplication;auid=3D"resource-lists";=

Accept: = application/resource-lists+xml

 

(clarification next=20 line)

If = I’m correct the=20 <rls-services> xml document will be = returned in the=20 NOTIFY and could contain the <resource-list>xcap uri tag. But = this is=20 only if there is a service, right?

 

If = anybody knows of a=20 good overview document (OMA is not very good at overview nor are = rfc:s) about=20 this, please share this.

 

 

Kind=20 regards,

Niklas=20 Fondberg

 

------_=_NextPart_001_01C8628B.57512D24-- --===============1841029035== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple --===============1841029035==-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jan 29 15:45:57 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJxL6-0004wp-HM; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:45:52 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JJxL5-0004ux-1U for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:45:51 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJxL4-0004ts-Aa for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:45:50 -0500 Received: from mx11.bbn.com ([128.33.0.80]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJxL3-00032Z-60 for simple@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:45:50 -0500 Received: from dhcp89-089-119.bbn.com ([128.89.89.119] helo=[127.0.0.1]) by mx11.bbn.com with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JJxL2-0005dK-55; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:45:48 -0500 Message-ID: <479F8FEB.4030709@bbn.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:43:23 -0500 From: Matt Lepinski Organization: BBN User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: simple@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161DE19@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161DE19@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 21be852dc93f0971708678c18d38c096 Cc: Geir Arne Sandbakken X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Geir Arne, Thank you for your work in getting out a new version of this document. First, I think the removal of sidebars is reasonable. In particular, I found the -00 text on sidebars to be confusing. So in the absence of a concrete proposal for how to support sidebars, I favor not dealing with sidebars at all in this document. Note: If this document is not going to provide support for sidebars, then I would recommend deleting the sentence in the introduction (3rd sentence of paragraph 3) that discusses the ability to form sub-conferences within an existing conference. Second, I think that the discussion of nicknames has improved in this version of the document. I wholeheartedly agree with Brian Rosen that we should clearly separate routing issues from display issues, and the current text is better in this regard. My understanding from reading the current document is that a nickname is a participant identity that is intended to be presented to the user by the UI. Furthermore, a nickname consists of a string (e.g. "HappyBob") along with a provider URI (e.g. nickname-provider@example.com) indicating the scope of the nickname. This URI specifies a service that is able to validate that a user with a particular SIP AOR has the right to assert the given nickname within the specified scope. The document doesn't specify a mechanism for validating the use of a nickname within a scope, however, if the scope is equal to the conference server then the validation is trivial. Therefore, there appear to be (up to) three identities associated with a user: (1) A SIP AOR that a participant uses to communicate with the conference server (This is in particular the identity used for authentication to the conference server); (2) A SIP URI that is used to address private messages (This is the SIP URI that is distributed to other participants via the conference event package. This SIP URI is equal to the SIP AOR unless the participant uses a privacy header in the INVITE sent to the conference server); (3) a nickname that is intended to be rendered to other participants by their chat UI (This nickname is distributed to other conference participants via the conference event package). The first two identities are used for routing messages within a conference and should probably not be rendered by the UI (especially when the SIP URI is not meaningful, as in the case where the conference server assigns a replacement URI in response to a privacy request). The third identity is intended to be used for display to the end-user and is presumably the identity that will be referred to in the text of the conference messages. Please correct me if I have misunderstood the intent of the document. Given my understanding of nicknames in the current document, I have the following comments: --- In regards to the first paragraph of Section 7, I think the functionality of receiving a private message without revealing a SIP AOR is orthogonal to providing a nickname for display to other users. --- In paragraph four of Section 7, you mention that a conference server may not accept nicknames for a particular conference. In such a case should the UI render the SIP URI (obtained via the conference event package) to the end-user? (I think we should provide suggestions for UI rendering of identity. Otherwise we create user confusion when Alice believes she is rendered to Bob as 'alice@example.com', but in truth Bob's UI renders Alice as 'NoNickname#1'.) --- In paragraph five of Section 7, I don't understand the sentence "Also referring to nicknames of participants inside the chat itself may be ambiguous if a participant is referring to a nickname without any scope." Could you please clarify? --- In paragraph one of Section 7.1, I would suggest clarifying that this mechanism is to 'reserve' a nickname for a participant (for as long as the participant is a member of the conference). In particular, the text at the end of Section 7 uses the term 'reservation' for the first nickname operation. Therefore, I think it is important to also use the word 'reserve' in Section 7.1. (Similarly, I would modify paragraph six of 7.1 to say that the NICKNAME request fails if 'the same nickname has already been reserved by another participant') --- In paragraph four (and five) of Section 7.1, I think it would be helpful to clarify that the server is validating a connection between a nickname and a participant's SIP AOR. That is, I think referring to a SIP URI here could be ambiguous because there are potentially many SIP URIs associated with a participant (e.g. the AOR in the from header, the GRUU in the contact header, the replacement URI created by the conference server to provide user anonymity, etc). --- In paragraph six, the meaning of the text 'for which the conference server has no authority' is unclear to me. I would consider deleting this clause and just saying 'the Use-Nickname header contains a nickname provider URI for which the conference server is unable to validate the nicknames'. --- In Section 9.4, there is an example of sending a private message addressed to Bob's nickname. In contrast, Section 6.2 specifies that private messages be addressed to the recipients SIP AOR (or replacement URI in the case where privacy was requested). I would recommend that the example in Section 9.4 be changed to remove reference to nicknames. Finally, I have two other non-nickname related comments: -- The second paragraph of section 5.2 refers to RFC 4574, I believe it should be RFC 4575 -- Paragraph 4 of Section 6.1 says "An MSRP switch that receives a SEND request from a participant SHOULD first verify that the From header field of the Message/CPIM wrapper is correctly populated with a valid URI as indicated earlier." I was unable to find the earlier indication that you refer to. Including a reference to a particular section of this document would be helpful. Thanks again for your work on this document, - Matt Lepinski :-> Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >The new version tries to encapsulate the recent discussions from the >list about nicknames and consistent routing of messages. It doesn't try >to resolve all open issues, but suggest a general direction for the way >forward. > >Change log: >1. Removed the Nickname URI. >2. The "Sending and Receiving Instant Messages" section no longer has >references to nicknames. >3. Changed the order of things as internal dependencies changed >4. Added a Nickname Provider URI which provides unambiguous scope for >the nickname. >5. The focus has to provide a single routable anonymous address called a >Replacement URI if privacy is requested by a participant when joining. >6. Sending private messages are now limited to a single participant. >7. Removed the Siderbar section >8. Removed the section "Nicknames and Multiple SIP Addresses of Record" >as the nickname URI can't collide with SIP AOR's any more. >9. Added a 428 response code to REPORT request for "Private messages not >supported by recipient" feedback. >10. Removed the section "Mapping Nicknames to Other identities" > >The most radical change not discussed on the list is the removal of >sidebars. Supporting it will require some quite more semantics in the >MSRP mixer, and I wanted to know if the general direction is ok before >going down that path. OTOH, there are multiple reasons for keeping it >this way. Firstly avoid making the composition complex when forwarding >messages having a multitude of replacement and participant URIs. It >could prove error prone having anonymous URIs reviled unintentionally. >Secondly it is now possible to detect if a single recipient is not able >to receive private messages, and it can be rendered at the senders UI. >Thirdly we avoid having two different ways of doing sidebars when XCON >is in place. > >If there is interest in having sidebar support in this memo, and I can >add extra semantics for this in next version of the draft. > >Thanks, >Geir Arne > > > >_______________________________________________ >Simple mailing list >Simple@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From southernerty4@museo8bits.com Tue Jan 29 16:25:06 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJxx4-0002tY-Iv for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:06 -0500 Received: from core-vulture-out-29.telecom.by ([213.184.224.29] helo=tech-224-29.telecom.by) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JJxx3-00058Q-Bc for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 16:25:06 -0500 Received: from [213.184.224.29] by smtp.secureserver.net; Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:25:04 +0200 From: "Devon Hutchins" To: Subject: JudsonImpressiveShlong Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:25:04 +0200 Message-ID: <01c862ce$2d214800$1de0b8d5@southernerty4> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1250" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2627 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal X-Spam-Score: 4.9 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 0f1ff0b0158b41ac6b9548d0972cdd31 LeilaObviousPenis http://www.pokerfast.com From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 04:19:02 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JK95q-0005sX-TX; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:18:54 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JK95p-0005sJ-L6 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:18:53 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JK95i-0005dL-8w for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:18:46 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JK95g-0003UX-6s for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:18:45 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0U9IgMr028431; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:18:42 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:18:42 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] I-D Action:draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:18:42 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161E1F1@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <479E24C3.7090907@stpeter.im> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] I-D Action:draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt Thread-Index: Achh3zI6siBymyDpREeJ8DIiRdgeGgBQ5ixA References: <479E24C3.7090907@stpeter.im> From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Peter Saint-Andre" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jan 2008 09:18:42.0613 (UTC) FILETIME=[1B7A4E50:01C86321] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Peter, If the community wants to have a specific terminology, I am more than happy apply any changes to the draft itself. Being new to the simple wg I feel it's not my call to select it though. Thanks, Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- > From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:stpeter@stpeter.im] >=20 > Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >=20 > > Title : Multi-party Instant Message (IM) Sessions Using the > > Message Session Relay Protocol (MSRP) > > Author(s) : A. Niemi, et al. > > Filename : draft-ietf-simple-chat-01.txt >=20 > I think it might be helpful for everyone in the real-time communications > space (or at least us IETFers) to settle on terminology for one-to-one > text chat vs. multi-user text chat. For many years, those of us in the > Jabber/XMPP community have called multi-user text chat "groupchat" and > have reserved the word "chat" for one-to-one text chat. Some people in > the RTC space also call multi-user text chat "text conferencing", on the > model of voice chat (one-to-one) vs. voice conferencing or video chat > vs. video conferencing. >=20 > Also, draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-chat discusses interworking between SIP > and XMPP for one-to-one chat (via MSRP), and the authors of that spec > plan to write draft-saintandre-sip-xmpp-groupchat (interworking for > multi-user chat). It would be good to have consistent terminology for > such functionality. >=20 > Just a thought. :) >=20 > Peter >=20 > -- > Peter Saint-Andre > https://stpeter.im/ _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From _uvagines@ANASPEC.COM Wed Jan 30 04:37:55 2008 Return-path: <_uvagines@ANASPEC.COM> Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JK9OF-0003eU-0o for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:37:55 -0500 Received: from host144-249-dynamic.6-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([87.6.249.144] helo=host146-249-dynamic.10-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JK9OE-0005If-BP for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:37:54 -0500 Message-ID: <001001c86323$c94bc390$92f90a57@utente> From: "lazaro Haese" <_uvagines@ANASPEC.COM> To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Your worst fears are now over - your tool can be enlarged Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:37:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C8632C.2B102B90" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C8632C.2B102B90 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Give it to her good with your super-large c0ck ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C8632C.2B102B90 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Give it to her good with your = super-large=20 c0ck ----------=_NextPart_000_000C_01C8632C.2B102B90-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 06:02:47 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKAiI-0006OE-EP; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:02:42 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKAiH-0006O9-K7 for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:02:41 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKAiH-0006O1-6g for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:02:41 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKAiF-0007ZH-O2 for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:02:41 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0UB250R023406; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:02:05 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:02:05 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:04:52 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161E263@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <479F8FEB.4030709@bbn.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted Thread-Index: Achit/vmoxjAj4JkQvK8a9InZ7Mt3wAbtfPw References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161DE19@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <479F8FEB.4030709@bbn.com> From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Matt Lepinski" , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jan 2008 11:02:05.0786 (UTC) FILETIME=[8CDB63A0:01C8632F] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f8184d7d4d1b986353eb58ea3e887935 Cc: X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Matt, Thank you for the feedback. I plan to publish another version including your comments before the 17th of February. Comments inline. Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Lepinski [mailto:mlepinski@bbn.com] >=20 > Geir Arne, >=20 > Thank you for your work in getting out a new version of this document. >=20 > First, I think the removal of sidebars is reasonable. In particular, I > found the -00 text on sidebars to be confusing. So in the absence of a > concrete proposal for how to support sidebars, I favor not dealing with > sidebars at all in this document. >=20 > Note: If this document is not going to provide support for sidebars, > then I would recommend deleting the sentence in the introduction (3rd > sentence of paragraph 3) that discusses the ability to form > sub-conferences within an existing conference. Done. > Second, I think that the discussion of nicknames has improved in this > version of the document. I wholeheartedly agree with Brian Rosen that we > should clearly separate routing issues from display issues, and the > current text is better in this regard. >=20 > My understanding from reading the current document is that a nickname is > a participant identity that is intended to be presented to the user by > the UI. Furthermore, a nickname consists of a string (e.g. "HappyBob") > along with a provider URI (e.g. nickname-provider@example.com) > indicating the scope of the nickname. This URI specifies a service that > is able to validate that a user with a particular SIP AOR has the right > to assert the given nickname within the specified scope. The document > doesn't specify a mechanism for validating the use of a nickname within > a scope, however, if the scope is equal to the conference server then > the validation is trivial. The validation is outside the scope of this document. Hopefully the general nickname mechanism will provide it. As you pointed out - validation inside the conference instance it self or the conference server should be trivial. > Therefore, there appear to be (up to) three identities associated with a > user: (1) A SIP AOR that a participant uses to communicate with the > conference server (This is in particular the identity used for > authentication to the conference server); (2) A SIP URI that is used to > address private messages (This is the SIP URI that is distributed to > other participants via the conference event package. This SIP URI is > equal to the SIP AOR unless the participant uses a privacy header in the > INVITE sent to the conference server); (3) a nickname that is intended > to be rendered to other participants by their chat UI (This nickname is > distributed to other conference participants via the conference event > package). The first two identities are used for routing messages within > a conference and should probably not be rendered by the UI (especially > when the SIP URI is not meaningful, as in the case where the conference > server assigns a replacement URI in response to a privacy request). The > third identity is intended to be used for display to the end-user and is > presumably the identity that will be referred to in the text of the > conference messages. >=20 > Please correct me if I have misunderstood the intent of the document. You are very much correct, and your description of the semantics reveals an issue. If there is a client that doesn't support nicknames, that user will refer to other participants inside the chat by their SIP URI (replacement URI or SIP AOR). If another client supporting nicknames is in the same conference, that user may refer to participants by their nicknames. This might lead to confusing chats where the users having clients not supporting nicknames will not understand who it is being referred to when nicknames are being used. It seems like nicknames can not be optional if used in a conference. > Given my understanding of nicknames in the current document, I have the > following comments: >=20 > --- In regards to the first paragraph of Section 7, I think the > functionality of receiving a private message without revealing a SIP AOR > is orthogonal to providing a nickname for display to other users. Yes, the introduction of the nickname text has to be changed. It is still influenced by the pervious proposed mechanism which routed messages and provided anonymity using the nickname itself. =20 > --- In paragraph four of Section 7, you mention that a conference server > may not accept nicknames for a particular conference. In such a case > should the UI render the SIP URI (obtained via the conference event > package) to the end-user? (I think we should provide suggestions for UI > rendering of identity. Otherwise we create user confusion when Alice > believes she is rendered to Bob as 'alice@example.com', but in truth > Bob's UI renders Alice as 'NoNickname#1'.) Good point. Even if we make nicknames mandatory to support, it's a very valid use case that the server will not allow nicknames. That will not lead to the confused situation of having some clients using nicknames - while others do not. Some clarifying text should be added to guide implementers when nicknames are not allowed. > --- In paragraph five of Section 7, I don't understand the sentence > "Also referring to nicknames of participants inside the chat itself may > be ambiguous if a participant is referring to a nickname without any > scope." Could you please clarify? What about: "Also referring to nicknames of participants inside the chat itself may be ambiguous if a participant is referring to a nickname without a reference to the nickname provider URI. Two or more nicknames can be equal inside a conference while having different nickname providers URIs" > --- In paragraph one of Section 7.1, I would suggest clarifying that > this mechanism is to 'reserve' a nickname for a participant (for as long > as the participant is a member of the conference). In particular, the > text at the end of Section 7 uses the term 'reservation' for the first > nickname operation. Therefore, I think it is important to also use the > word 'reserve' in Section 7.1. (Similarly, I would modify paragraph six > of 7.1 to say that the NICKNAME request fails if 'the same nickname has > already been reserved by another participant') Done. =20 > --- In paragraph four (and five) of Section 7.1, I think it would be > helpful to clarify that the server is validating a connection between a > nickname and a participant's SIP AOR. That is, I think referring to a > SIP URI here could be ambiguous because there are potentially many SIP > URIs associated with a participant (e.g. the AOR in the from header, the > GRUU in the contact header, the replacement URI created by the > conference server to provide user anonymity, etc). Done. =20 =20 > --- In paragraph six, the meaning of the text 'for which the conference > server has no authority' is unclear to me. I would consider deleting > this clause and just saying 'the Use-Nickname header contains a nickname > provider URI for which the conference server is unable to validate the > nicknames'. Much better. Done. =20 > --- In Section 9.4, there is an example of sending a private message > addressed to Bob's nickname. In contrast, Section 6.2 specifies that > private messages be addressed to the recipients SIP AOR (or replacement > URI in the case where privacy was requested). I would recommend that the > example in Section 9.4 be changed to remove reference to nicknames. Missed that one. Done. > Finally, I have two other non-nickname related comments: >=20 > -- The second paragraph of section 5.2 refers to RFC 4574, I believe it > should be RFC 4575 Yes, done. > -- Paragraph 4 of Section 6.1 says "An MSRP switch that receives a SEND > request from a participant SHOULD first verify that the From header > field of the Message/CPIM wrapper is correctly populated with a valid > URI as indicated earlier." I was unable to find the earlier indication > that you refer to. Including a reference to a particular section of this > document would be helpful. Will add some clarifying text. > Thanks again for your work on this document, Thanks again for providing valuable feedback. > - Matt Lepinski :-> > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: >=20 > >The new version tries to encapsulate the recent discussions from the > >list about nicknames and consistent routing of messages. It doesn't try > >to resolve all open issues, but suggest a general direction for the way > >forward. > > > >Change log: > >1. Removed the Nickname URI. > >2. The "Sending and Receiving Instant Messages" section no longer has > >references to nicknames. > >3. Changed the order of things as internal dependencies changed > >4. Added a Nickname Provider URI which provides unambiguous scope for > >the nickname. > >5. The focus has to provide a single routable anonymous address called a > >Replacement URI if privacy is requested by a participant when joining. > >6. Sending private messages are now limited to a single participant. > >7. Removed the Siderbar section > >8. Removed the section "Nicknames and Multiple SIP Addresses of Record" > >as the nickname URI can't collide with SIP AOR's any more. > >9. Added a 428 response code to REPORT request for "Private messages not > >supported by recipient" feedback. > >10. Removed the section "Mapping Nicknames to Other identities" > > > >The most radical change not discussed on the list is the removal of > >sidebars. Supporting it will require some quite more semantics in the > >MSRP mixer, and I wanted to know if the general direction is ok before > >going down that path. OTOH, there are multiple reasons for keeping it > >this way. Firstly avoid making the composition complex when forwarding > >messages having a multitude of replacement and participant URIs. It > >could prove error prone having anonymous URIs reviled unintentionally. > >Secondly it is now possible to detect if a single recipient is not able > >to receive private messages, and it can be rendered at the senders UI. > >Thirdly we avoid having two different ways of doing sidebars when XCON > >is in place. > > > >If there is interest in having sidebar support in this memo, and I can > >add extra semantics for this in next version of the draft. > > > >Thanks, > >Geir Arne > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Simple mailing list > >Simple@ietf.org > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > > > >=20 _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 10:38:56 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKF1X-0001nV-O0; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:38:51 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKF1U-0001b0-Ls for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:38:48 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKF1T-0001aV-OE; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:38:47 -0500 Received: from dsl001-129-069.dfw1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([72.1.129.69] helo=estacado.net) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKF1T-0003oa-D9; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:38:47 -0500 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (takahe.estacado.net [72.1.129.96]) (authenticated bits=0) by estacado.net (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m0UFcfSZ044650 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:38:44 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from rjsparks@estacado.net) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v753) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed To: sip List , sipping LIST , simple mailing list From: Robert Sparks Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:38:39 -0500 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.753) X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Cc: Subject: [Simple] Registration for SIPit 22 is open X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org SIPit 22 will be hosted by the University of New Hampshire Interoperability Laboratory April 14 through 18, 2008. Registration is $350 (USD) per person. Registration will close April 4. Space is limited, so register early to ensure a seat. Additional registration details are available at http://www.sipit.net _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 10:59:39 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKFLc-00087K-9K; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:59:36 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKFLb-00086g-Ac for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:59:35 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKFLb-00086R-0V for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:59:35 -0500 Received: from ebru.winwebhosting.com ([74.54.111.226]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKFLX-0008D2-4x for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:59:34 -0500 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSLT41xp) by ebru.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JKFL6-0002D3-GO; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:59:05 -0600 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Geir Arne Sandbakken'" References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161DE19@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <479F8FEB.4030709@bbn.com> Subject: RE: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 10:59:04 -0500 Message-ID: <03aa01c86359$0cc845f0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: Achit/BKOk6XYfg0SWmIDILNCJqCVAAn1iLw In-Reply-To: <479F8FEB.4030709@bbn.com> X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ebru.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d9238570526f12788af3d33c67f37625 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I haven't had time to organize a complete review of this version. I agree with Matt that it's much improved. We have discussed the notion of validating nicknames as part of the generalized nickname discussion. The notion was that there was a URI that you could ask "did you assign this nickname to this AoR?" The text in the document is consistent with that notion. However, I thought we agreed that in MSRP Chat, the only nicknames allowed were those assigned by the chat server. Externally scoped nicks were not considered. Nicks were restricted to be unique within the chat server. This avoided the issue of how you render the same nick from different domains. Since you don't describe the validation, and you don't describe how to render nick collision from different domains, I think you can just drop the whole validation URI. You simply propose a nick, which has to be unique in the chat server domain, it is accepted or not, and you use it. I also agree with Matt that you are known to the chat server by your AoR, and you are known to other participants by the URI in the roster, which may be your AoR or may be anonymous, and that's all there is. Nicks show up in the roster and are used to render UIs, and not to address. I wonder if the server can assign you a nick if you don't ask for one. It could use any algorithm it wanted to. It would put that in the nickname field in the roster. Then everyone has the same string to render for the UI. Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Lepinski [mailto:mlepinski@bbn.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 3:43 PM > To: simple@ietf.org > Cc: Geir Arne Sandbakken > Subject: Re: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted > > Geir Arne, > > Thank you for your work in getting out a new version of this document. > > First, I think the removal of sidebars is reasonable. In particular, I > found the -00 text on sidebars to be confusing. So in the absence of a > concrete proposal for how to support sidebars, I favor not dealing with > sidebars at all in this document. > > Note: If this document is not going to provide support for sidebars, > then I would recommend deleting the sentence in the introduction (3rd > sentence of paragraph 3) that discusses the ability to form > sub-conferences within an existing conference. > > Second, I think that the discussion of nicknames has improved in this > version of the document. I wholeheartedly agree with Brian Rosen that we > should clearly separate routing issues from display issues, and the > current text is better in this regard. > > My understanding from reading the current document is that a nickname is > a participant identity that is intended to be presented to the user by > the UI. Furthermore, a nickname consists of a string (e.g. "HappyBob") > along with a provider URI (e.g. nickname-provider@example.com) > indicating the scope of the nickname. This URI specifies a service that > is able to validate that a user with a particular SIP AOR has the right > to assert the given nickname within the specified scope. The document > doesn't specify a mechanism for validating the use of a nickname within > a scope, however, if the scope is equal to the conference server then > the validation is trivial. > > Therefore, there appear to be (up to) three identities associated with a > user: (1) A SIP AOR that a participant uses to communicate with the > conference server (This is in particular the identity used for > authentication to the conference server); (2) A SIP URI that is used to > address private messages (This is the SIP URI that is distributed to > other participants via the conference event package. This SIP URI is > equal to the SIP AOR unless the participant uses a privacy header in the > INVITE sent to the conference server); (3) a nickname that is intended > to be rendered to other participants by their chat UI (This nickname is > distributed to other conference participants via the conference event > package). The first two identities are used for routing messages within > a conference and should probably not be rendered by the UI (especially > when the SIP URI is not meaningful, as in the case where the conference > server assigns a replacement URI in response to a privacy request). The > third identity is intended to be used for display to the end-user and is > presumably the identity that will be referred to in the text of the > conference messages. > > Please correct me if I have misunderstood the intent of the document. > > Given my understanding of nicknames in the current document, I have the > following comments: > > --- In regards to the first paragraph of Section 7, I think the > functionality of receiving a private message without revealing a SIP AOR > is orthogonal to providing a nickname for display to other users. > > --- In paragraph four of Section 7, you mention that a conference server > may not accept nicknames for a particular conference. In such a case > should the UI render the SIP URI (obtained via the conference event > package) to the end-user? (I think we should provide suggestions for UI > rendering of identity. Otherwise we create user confusion when Alice > believes she is rendered to Bob as 'alice@example.com', but in truth > Bob's UI renders Alice as 'NoNickname#1'.) > > --- In paragraph five of Section 7, I don't understand the sentence > "Also referring to nicknames of participants inside the chat itself may > be ambiguous if a participant is referring to a nickname without any > scope." Could you please clarify? > > --- In paragraph one of Section 7.1, I would suggest clarifying that > this mechanism is to 'reserve' a nickname for a participant (for as long > as the participant is a member of the conference). In particular, the > text at the end of Section 7 uses the term 'reservation' for the first > nickname operation. Therefore, I think it is important to also use the > word 'reserve' in Section 7.1. (Similarly, I would modify paragraph six > of 7.1 to say that the NICKNAME request fails if 'the same nickname has > already been reserved by another participant') > > --- In paragraph four (and five) of Section 7.1, I think it would be > helpful to clarify that the server is validating a connection between a > nickname and a participant's SIP AOR. That is, I think referring to a > SIP URI here could be ambiguous because there are potentially many SIP > URIs associated with a participant (e.g. the AOR in the from header, the > GRUU in the contact header, the replacement URI created by the > conference server to provide user anonymity, etc). > > --- In paragraph six, the meaning of the text 'for which the conference > server has no authority' is unclear to me. I would consider deleting > this clause and just saying 'the Use-Nickname header contains a nickname > provider URI for which the conference server is unable to validate the > nicknames'. > > --- In Section 9.4, there is an example of sending a private message > addressed to Bob's nickname. In contrast, Section 6.2 specifies that > private messages be addressed to the recipients SIP AOR (or replacement > URI in the case where privacy was requested). I would recommend that the > example in Section 9.4 be changed to remove reference to nicknames. > > Finally, I have two other non-nickname related comments: > > -- The second paragraph of section 5.2 refers to RFC 4574, I believe it > should be RFC 4575 > > -- Paragraph 4 of Section 6.1 says "An MSRP switch that receives a SEND > request from a participant SHOULD first verify that the From header > field of the Message/CPIM wrapper is correctly populated with a valid > URI as indicated earlier." I was unable to find the earlier indication > that you refer to. Including a reference to a particular section of this > document would be helpful. > > Thanks again for your work on this document, > - Matt Lepinski :-> > > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > >The new version tries to encapsulate the recent discussions from the > >list about nicknames and consistent routing of messages. It doesn't try > >to resolve all open issues, but suggest a general direction for the way > >forward. > > > >Change log: > >1. Removed the Nickname URI. > >2. The "Sending and Receiving Instant Messages" section no longer has > >references to nicknames. > >3. Changed the order of things as internal dependencies changed > >4. Added a Nickname Provider URI which provides unambiguous scope for > >the nickname. > >5. The focus has to provide a single routable anonymous address called a > >Replacement URI if privacy is requested by a participant when joining. > >6. Sending private messages are now limited to a single participant. > >7. Removed the Siderbar section > >8. Removed the section "Nicknames and Multiple SIP Addresses of Record" > >as the nickname URI can't collide with SIP AOR's any more. > >9. Added a 428 response code to REPORT request for "Private messages not > >supported by recipient" feedback. > >10. Removed the section "Mapping Nicknames to Other identities" > > > >The most radical change not discussed on the list is the removal of > >sidebars. Supporting it will require some quite more semantics in the > >MSRP mixer, and I wanted to know if the general direction is ok before > >going down that path. OTOH, there are multiple reasons for keeping it > >this way. Firstly avoid making the composition complex when forwarding > >messages having a multitude of replacement and participant URIs. It > >could prove error prone having anonymous URIs reviled unintentionally. > >Secondly it is now possible to detect if a single recipient is not able > >to receive private messages, and it can be rendered at the senders UI. > >Thirdly we avoid having two different ways of doing sidebars when XCON > >is in place. > > > >If there is interest in having sidebar support in this memo, and I can > >add extra semantics for this in next version of the draft. > > > >Thanks, > >Geir Arne > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Simple mailing list > >Simple@ietf.org > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 12:06:56 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKGOj-0000yt-Cc; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:06:53 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKGOi-0000vE-1p for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:06:52 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKGOh-0000v2-Kf for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:06:51 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKGOf-0007lX-Vv for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:06:51 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0UH6W75014968; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:06:32 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:05:17 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:05:03 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161E3A0@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <03aa01c86359$0cc845f0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted Thread-Index: Achit/BKOk6XYfg0SWmIDILNCJqCVAAn1iLwAAHgJeA= References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161DE19@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <479F8FEB.4030709@bbn.com> <03aa01c86359$0cc845f0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Brian Rosen" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jan 2008 17:05:17.0472 (UTC) FILETIME=[49B6CA00:01C86362] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3b8eea209b62bd15620865bc4fbef8cd Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Brian, Thank you for the feedback. Comments inline. Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br@brianrosen.net] >=20 > I haven't had time to organize a complete review of this version. I agree > with Matt that it's much improved. >=20 > We have discussed the notion of validating nicknames as part of the > generalized nickname discussion. The notion was that there was a URI that > you could ask "did you assign this nickname to this AoR?" The text in the > document is consistent with that notion. >=20 > However, I thought we agreed that in MSRP Chat, the only nicknames allowed > were those assigned by the chat server. Externally scoped nicks were not > considered. Nicks were restricted to be unique within the chat server. > This avoided the issue of how you render the same nick from different > domains. > > Since you don't describe the validation, and you don't describe how to > render nick collision from different domains, I think you can just drop > the whole validation URI. You simply propose a nick, which has to be=20 > unique in the chat server domain, it is accepted or not, and you use it. If you think that the Nickname Provider URI (validation URI) is not required to be backwards compatible with a general mechanism, I will be happy to remove it. Then the focus can have whatever policy it likes to ensure uniqueness of the nickname string - as long as the nickname at least is unique in a conference instance. This leaves the clients in the clear. > I also agree with Matt that you are known to the chat server by your AoR, > and you are known to other participants by the URI in the roster, which > may be your AoR or may be anonymous, and that's all there is. Nicks=20 > show up in the roster and are used to render UIs, and not to address. This was the intent of the current draft. The reason I introduced the "replacement URI" terminology was that I added the property of routing anonymous messages inside the MSRP switch. If it is ok to use the terminology "anonymous URI" for such a purpose, I can remove the "replacement URI" definition as well. I just wanted to be cautions as several specifications use/define anonymous URI, and did not want to come into conflict with them. > I wonder if the server can assign you a nick if you don't ask for one. It > could use any algorithm it wanted to. It would put that in the nickname > field in the roster. Then everyone has the same string to render for the > UI. We can not have a conference/chat combining client with and without nicknames, so the server would need to render something before the participant sets it. Alternatively the participant is not part of the conference before the nickname is set. > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Matt Lepinski [mailto:mlepinski@bbn.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 3:43 PM > > To: simple@ietf.org > > Cc: Geir Arne Sandbakken > > Subject: Re: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted > > > > Geir Arne, > > > > Thank you for your work in getting out a new version of this document. > > > > First, I think the removal of sidebars is reasonable. In particular, I > > found the -00 text on sidebars to be confusing. So in the absence of a > > concrete proposal for how to support sidebars, I favor not dealing with > > sidebars at all in this document. > > > > Note: If this document is not going to provide support for sidebars, > > then I would recommend deleting the sentence in the introduction (3rd > > sentence of paragraph 3) that discusses the ability to form > > sub-conferences within an existing conference. > > > > Second, I think that the discussion of nicknames has improved in this > > version of the document. I wholeheartedly agree with Brian Rosen that we > > should clearly separate routing issues from display issues, and the > > current text is better in this regard. > > > > My understanding from reading the current document is that a nickname is > > a participant identity that is intended to be presented to the user by > > the UI. Furthermore, a nickname consists of a string (e.g. "HappyBob") > > along with a provider URI (e.g. nickname-provider@example.com) > > indicating the scope of the nickname. This URI specifies a service that > > is able to validate that a user with a particular SIP AOR has the right > > to assert the given nickname within the specified scope. The document > > doesn't specify a mechanism for validating the use of a nickname within > > a scope, however, if the scope is equal to the conference server then > > the validation is trivial. > > > > Therefore, there appear to be (up to) three identities associated with a > > user: (1) A SIP AOR that a participant uses to communicate with the > > conference server (This is in particular the identity used for > > authentication to the conference server); (2) A SIP URI that is used to > > address private messages (This is the SIP URI that is distributed to > > other participants via the conference event package. This SIP URI is > > equal to the SIP AOR unless the participant uses a privacy header in the > > INVITE sent to the conference server); (3) a nickname that is intended > > to be rendered to other participants by their chat UI (This nickname is > > distributed to other conference participants via the conference event > > package). The first two identities are used for routing messages within > > a conference and should probably not be rendered by the UI (especially > > when the SIP URI is not meaningful, as in the case where the conference > > server assigns a replacement URI in response to a privacy request). The > > third identity is intended to be used for display to the end-user and is > > presumably the identity that will be referred to in the text of the > > conference messages. > > > > Please correct me if I have misunderstood the intent of the document. > > > > Given my understanding of nicknames in the current document, I have the > > following comments: > > > > --- In regards to the first paragraph of Section 7, I think the > > functionality of receiving a private message without revealing a SIP AOR > > is orthogonal to providing a nickname for display to other users. > > > > --- In paragraph four of Section 7, you mention that a conference server > > may not accept nicknames for a particular conference. In such a case > > should the UI render the SIP URI (obtained via the conference event > > package) to the end-user? (I think we should provide suggestions for UI > > rendering of identity. Otherwise we create user confusion when Alice > > believes she is rendered to Bob as 'alice@example.com', but in truth > > Bob's UI renders Alice as 'NoNickname#1'.) > > > > --- In paragraph five of Section 7, I don't understand the sentence > > "Also referring to nicknames of participants inside the chat itself may > > be ambiguous if a participant is referring to a nickname without any > > scope." Could you please clarify? > > > > --- In paragraph one of Section 7.1, I would suggest clarifying that > > this mechanism is to 'reserve' a nickname for a participant (for as long > > as the participant is a member of the conference). In particular, the > > text at the end of Section 7 uses the term 'reservation' for the first > > nickname operation. Therefore, I think it is important to also use the > > word 'reserve' in Section 7.1. (Similarly, I would modify paragraph six > > of 7.1 to say that the NICKNAME request fails if 'the same nickname has > > already been reserved by another participant') > > > > --- In paragraph four (and five) of Section 7.1, I think it would be > > helpful to clarify that the server is validating a connection between a > > nickname and a participant's SIP AOR. That is, I think referring to a > > SIP URI here could be ambiguous because there are potentially many SIP > > URIs associated with a participant (e.g. the AOR in the from header, the > > GRUU in the contact header, the replacement URI created by the > > conference server to provide user anonymity, etc). > > > > --- In paragraph six, the meaning of the text 'for which the conference > > server has no authority' is unclear to me. I would consider deleting > > this clause and just saying 'the Use-Nickname header contains a nickname > > provider URI for which the conference server is unable to validate the > > nicknames'. > > > > --- In Section 9.4, there is an example of sending a private message > > addressed to Bob's nickname. In contrast, Section 6.2 specifies that > > private messages be addressed to the recipients SIP AOR (or replacement > > URI in the case where privacy was requested). I would recommend that the > > example in Section 9.4 be changed to remove reference to nicknames. > > > > Finally, I have two other non-nickname related comments: > > > > -- The second paragraph of section 5.2 refers to RFC 4574, I believe it > > should be RFC 4575 > > > > -- Paragraph 4 of Section 6.1 says "An MSRP switch that receives a SEND > > request from a participant SHOULD first verify that the From header > > field of the Message/CPIM wrapper is correctly populated with a valid > > URI as indicated earlier." I was unable to find the earlier indication > > that you refer to. Including a reference to a particular section of this > > document would be helpful. > > > > Thanks again for your work on this document, > > - Matt Lepinski :-> > > > > Geir Arne Sandbakken wrote: > > > > >The new version tries to encapsulate the recent discussions from the > > >list about nicknames and consistent routing of messages. It doesn't > try > > >to resolve all open issues, but suggest a general direction for the way > > >forward. > > > > > >Change log: > > >1. Removed the Nickname URI. > > >2. The "Sending and Receiving Instant Messages" section no longer has > > >references to nicknames. > > >3. Changed the order of things as internal dependencies changed > > >4. Added a Nickname Provider URI which provides unambiguous scope for > > >the nickname. > > >5. The focus has to provide a single routable anonymous address called > a > > >Replacement URI if privacy is requested by a participant when joining. > > >6. Sending private messages are now limited to a single participant. > > >7. Removed the Siderbar section > > >8. Removed the section "Nicknames and Multiple SIP Addresses of Record" > > >as the nickname URI can't collide with SIP AOR's any more. > > >9. Added a 428 response code to REPORT request for "Private messages > not > > >supported by recipient" feedback. > > >10. Removed the section "Mapping Nicknames to Other identities" > > > > > >The most radical change not discussed on the list is the removal of > > >sidebars. Supporting it will require some quite more semantics in the > > >MSRP mixer, and I wanted to know if the general direction is ok before > > >going down that path. OTOH, there are multiple reasons for keeping it > > >this way. Firstly avoid making the composition complex when forwarding > > >messages having a multitude of replacement and participant URIs. It > > >could prove error prone having anonymous URIs reviled unintentionally. > > >Secondly it is now possible to detect if a single recipient is not able > > >to receive private messages, and it can be rendered at the senders UI. > > >Thirdly we avoid having two different ways of doing sidebars when XCON > > >is in place. > > > > > >If there is interest in having sidebar support in this memo, and I can > > >add extra semantics for this in next version of the draft. > > > > > >Thanks, > > >Geir Arne > > > > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Simple mailing list > > >Simple@ietf.org > > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Simple mailing list > > Simple@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 14:57:19 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKJ3a-0007BP-Bb; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:57:14 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKJ3Y-00079L-Pt for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:57:12 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKJ3Y-000793-Ep for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:57:12 -0500 Received: from ebru.winwebhosting.com ([74.54.111.226]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKJ3Y-0006l4-1Y for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:57:12 -0500 Received: from neustargw.va.neustar.com ([209.173.53.233] helo=BROSLT41xp) by ebru.winwebhosting.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1JKJ3B-0001GM-6S; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:56:49 -0600 From: "Brian Rosen" To: "'Geir Arne Sandbakken'" References: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161DE19@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> <479F8FEB.4030709@bbn.com> <03aa01c86359$0cc845f0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161E3A0@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> Subject: RE: [Simple] Multiparty MSRP-01 submitted Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:56:51 -0500 Message-ID: <03fa01c8637a$442b56b0$640fa8c0@cis.neustar.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Thread-Index: Achit/BKOk6XYfg0SWmIDILNCJqCVAAn1iLwAAHgJeAABqU/IA== In-Reply-To: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161E3A0@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ebru.winwebhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - brianrosen.net X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034 Cc: simple@ietf.org X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org > If you think that the Nickname Provider URI (validation URI) is not > required to be backwards compatible with a general mechanism, I will be > happy to remove it. Then the focus can have whatever policy it likes to > ensure uniqueness of the nickname string - as long as the nickname at > least is unique in a conference instance. This leaves the clients in > the clear. I am okay with that. The generalized mechanism can define the validation URI idea. > This was the intent of the current draft. The reason I introduced the > "replacement URI" terminology was that I added the property of routing > anonymous messages inside the MSRP switch. If it is ok to use the > terminology "anonymous URI" for such a purpose, I can remove the > "replacement URI" definition as well. I just wanted to be cautions as > several specifications use/define anonymous URI, and did not want to > come into conflict with them. I think the draft ought to say that the URI in the roster must be useful for addressing private messages or for any other addressing purposes within the chat. That means they are probably not in an anonymous domain, but rather a random user part of a URI in the chat domain. I don't think you need any other mechanism in MSRP. > We can not have a conference/chat combining client with and without > nicknames, so the server would need to render something before the > participant sets it. Alternatively the participant is not part of the > conference before the nickname is set. I think it's the former: if a participant didn't ask for a nickname, the server assigns him one and shows it in the roster. Everyone uses what's in the roster for rendering UIs. I don't like the other idea of not letting the participant in the chat until he has a nickname. Brian _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From TammiacronymConnell@yahoo.com Wed Jan 30 18:18:11 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMC0-0000B3-W3; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:18:09 -0500 Received: from [88.235.74.146] (helo=oem8eeb46f9302) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMC0-0005Hz-KB; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:18:08 -0500 Received: from phrase by yahoo.com with SMTP id ZGMMJrmW4V for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 01:17:50 -0200 From: "Dollie Salter" To: Subject: Come find out. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.8 (++++) X-Scan-Signature: 7bac9cb154eb5790ae3b2913587a40de We have it all! We have it all! We give out BONUSES to anyone who joins. Huge progressive jackpots, slots, multi-hand, and single-hand blackjack. http://dodthis.net.cn/ From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 18:26:58 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMKT-0005LT-7q; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:26:53 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMKS-0005Jz-1n for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:26:52 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMKR-0005Io-GJ for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:26:51 -0500 Received: from dublin.packetizer.com ([209.139.209.61]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMKR-0005YW-2T for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:26:51 -0500 Received: from berlin.arid.us (cpe-075-182-115-036.nc.res.rr.com [75.182.115.36]) (authenticated bits=128) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m0UNPOxE002846 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:26:49 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1201735609; bh=quo82AZWyt75GbFasDd0hbbxgbJFC7LXkDX3CCTF uuI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:Thread-Index: Content-Language; b=PP8zqcjFfjTFUxJJYQLue9wZJi8pynp/DUGMYl2M3cytk1 31XMsRewC9UfakFcNJIPN1HGyvt4a9RfAId/RVlKl3OE21Qbnw5lA8gcxjN5C/AYynk s3anvybtkgEbnzvRS89F795IMF/roS6KXXhZaNeuiLNq//OYqB7Ixe5tsw= Received: from sydney (sydney.arid.us [192.168.1.20]) by berlin.arid.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id m0UNPN7j013930 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:25:24 -0500 From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Simple WG'" Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:24:43 -0500 Message-ID: <002e01c86397$4ba49d30$e2edd790$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achjl0t2/mSzUFFBRneN8s02hY2skA== Content-Language: en-us X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?'Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m'?= , 'Gregg Vanderheiden' Subject: [Simple] Re: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Folks, During the middle of the month, there was a little discussion on the draft draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00. As discussed, this draft is intended to provide a means of enabling real-time text transmission between devices using MSRP. Looking through the discussion that took place, I believe the only concern was that an MSRP relay might collect several text chunks and combine that, thus effectively breaking RTT communication. That's true and we cannot prevent it, but as Gunnar highlighted, there is an attribute included that provides a hint to relays that immediate delivery is required. We may need a stronger hint and/or means to select MSRP relays that will deliver the functionality we need. Were there any other concerns? While there are certainly issues we need to address (and several noted in the initial draft), we wanted to put this before the group to try to build consensus for this general direction. It seems that there was support for this idea (and no objection that I could see). As such, would be acceptable to the group to make this a work item and begin actively progressing the draft within SIMPLE? Thanks, Paul _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 18:59:46 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMqE-0000s8-Lb; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:42 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMqD-0000rz-3h for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:41 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMqC-0000rr-Or for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:40 -0500 Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKMqC-0006YZ-Ex for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:40 -0500 Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Jan 2008 18:59:34 -0500 Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m0UNxXIl003080; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:33 -0500 Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id m0UNweVt005190; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:59:33 GMT Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:28 -0500 Received: from [161.44.174.133] ([161.44.174.133]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:28 -0500 Message-ID: <47A10F68.70607@cisco.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:59:36 -0500 From: Paul Kyzivat User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Paul E. Jones" Subject: Re: [Simple] Re: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt References: <002e01c86397$4ba49d30$e2edd790$@com> In-Reply-To: <002e01c86397$4ba49d30$e2edd790$@com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Jan 2008 23:59:28.0233 (UTC) FILETIME=[25EBFD90:01C8639C] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1453; t=1201737573; x=1202601573; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=pkyzivat@cisco.com; z=From:=20Paul=20Kyzivat=20 |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Simple]=20=09Re=3A=20I-DAction=3Adraft -hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt |Sender:=20 |To:=20=22Paul=20E.=20Jones=22=20; bh=2EWGF7+v2CeG14CV/3PlV1W8TP1DnEdHRdTvZo+H8T0=; b=Dh7HhxPMA6g42V0vuctVxNpqIchSaBUOlONc9DrPBCJt6GMWpf/Z2Bk4df +Yrijmfk7a+iAmdl9Jemw9wzo9lbpCRQj+22OZ/1SP4nWuGRSdO5SHa4uaT8 VOtra9W1EP; Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=pkyzivat@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; ); X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b Cc: 'Gregg Vanderheiden' , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=27?= , 'Simple WG' , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=27Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Its ok by me. Paul Paul E. Jones wrote: > Folks, > > During the middle of the month, there was a little discussion on the draft > draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00. As discussed, this draft is > intended to provide a means of enabling real-time text transmission between > devices using MSRP. > > Looking through the discussion that took place, I believe the only concern > was that an MSRP relay might collect several text chunks and combine that, > thus effectively breaking RTT communication. That's true and we cannot > prevent it, but as Gunnar highlighted, there is an attribute included that > provides a hint to relays that immediate delivery is required. We may need > a stronger hint and/or means to select MSRP relays that will deliver the > functionality we need. > > Were there any other concerns? > > While there are certainly issues we need to address (and several noted in > the initial draft), we wanted to put this before the group to try to build > consensus for this general direction. It seems that there was support for > this idea (and no objection that I could see). As such, would be acceptable > to the group to make this a work item and begin actively progressing the > draft within SIMPLE? > > Thanks, > Paul > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple > _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From simple-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jan 30 22:34:34 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKQC3-0000Q5-Ud; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:34:27 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKQC2-0000Pw-AL for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:34:26 -0500 Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKQC1-0000Po-JM for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:34:25 -0500 Received: from dublin.packetizer.com ([209.139.209.61]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKQC0-0003Pg-TH for simple@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:34:25 -0500 Received: from berlin.arid.us (cpe-075-182-115-036.nc.res.rr.com [75.182.115.36]) (authenticated bits=128) by dublin.packetizer.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m0V3YHOG008725 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:34:23 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=packetizer.com; s=dublin; t=1201750464; bh=1g39EMuosN8UX2WNNNcriGG6+bEQEWmKvddLCtTk zrM=; h=From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer: Thread-Index:Content-Language; b=cnjtW5CncrF8znFmZhQDleKmMq2KUchw7 Bn10/ZCyql4Xa5qbTAXwDsq2v6WgpMXfQKDks6O+wbadXF5d6qxVRjP1ACDCV6XmuuB SLTngiLBDR0vMIBGhWW4dvlXpZ3bmqoAoqMe16YdX/jn4o0YDqsU9S3DwViJyGacm6l ZeH8= Received: from sydney (sydney.arid.us [192.168.1.20]) by berlin.arid.us (8.12.8/8.12.8) with SMTP id m0V3YG7j014689 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:34:16 -0500 From: "Paul E. Jones" To: "'Gregg Vanderheiden'" , "'Simple WG'" References: <27887677.1201735656634.JavaMail.root@m06> <007d01c863b7$1f3b63d0$3caccc4b@NC84301> In-Reply-To: <007d01c863b7$1f3b63d0$3caccc4b@NC84301> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:33:34 -0500 Message-ID: <006701c863ba$0f68ea60$2e3abf20$@com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Achjl0t2/mSzUFFBRneN8s02hY2skAAHuKzQAABZdDA= Content-Language: en-us X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 67c1ea29f88502ef6a32ccec927970f0 Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?'Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m'?= Subject: [Simple] RE: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org Gregg, There might be special servers that log messages and which might suffer = from a lack of processing power. Those are the ones that worry me the most. Perhaps a call to a large bank's call center might result in an en bloc = mode of text conversation. A typical text conversation that transmits 3 or 4 packets per second = will consume less bandwidth than a typical voice conversation that transmits = 50 packets per second. So, bandwidth is used, but I'm not too concerned = about it for human-to-human conversation. Perhaps more importantly, the processing required to merely forward an = MSRP packet is far less than performing any kind of processing on the packet. = In a typical conversation, would we expect that there would just be = entities like SBCs in the path between two MSRP-enabled devices? If so, I will expect packets to get forwarded without modification whatsoever. So, for the more general use cases of person-to-person communication, captioned telephony, emergency service calls, etc., I would expect that = if two devices want to use real-time text transmission, it will be = possible. Paul > -----Original Message----- > From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gv@trace.wisc.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 10:13 PM > To: 'Paul E. Jones'; 'Simple WG' > Cc: 'Gunnar Hellstr=F6m' > Subject: RE: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt >=20 > the other major concern I heard was the bandwidth. This is not a > problem > generally on wired networks and video on demand seems to make it sound > like > the issue would be dwarfed by other content flow - even on wireless > (where > we hear this the most). >=20 > But i think that listing both the bandwidth requirments and the relay > issue > up front would be enough to move this into discussion. >=20 > we should do that in a way that says "if we go this way - we agree to > live > with the bandwidth issue and address the relay issue." >=20 > otherwise im afraid we may end up with . > "oh we can fix the bandwidth issue by just not doing it in real-time > but say > every second or so" (which breaks CapTel and is bad for conversation > and > emergencies -- creates overlaps and confusion esp for elders. ) > -- and the relay problem is solved by hinting (even though it doesn't > have > to be followed so won't always work.) >=20 > But other than strenthening those - i think we are ready to vet it. >=20 >=20 > Gregg > -- ------------------------------ > Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. >=20 >=20 >=20 > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul E. Jones [mailto:paulej@packetizer.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 5:25 PM > > To: 'Simple WG' > > Cc: 'Gunnar Hellstr=F6m'; 'Gregg Vanderheiden' > > Subject: Re: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission- > 00.txt > > > > Folks, > > > > During the middle of the month, there was a little discussion > > on the draft draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00. As > > discussed, this draft is intended to provide a means of > > enabling real-time text transmission between devices using MSRP. > > > > Looking through the discussion that took place, I believe the > > only concern was that an MSRP relay might collect several > > text chunks and combine that, thus effectively breaking RTT > > communication. That's true and we cannot prevent it, but as > > Gunnar highlighted, there is an attribute included that > > provides a hint to relays that immediate delivery is > > required. We may need a stronger hint and/or means to select > > MSRP relays that will deliver the functionality we need. > > > > Were there any other concerns? > > > > While there are certainly issues we need to address (and > > several noted in the initial draft), we wanted to put this > > before the group to try to build consensus for this general > > direction. It seems that there was support for this idea > > (and no objection that I could see). As such, would be > > acceptable to the group to make this a work item and begin > > actively progressing the draft within SIMPLE? > > > > Thanks, > > Paul > > > > > > >=20 >=20 _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From nedarspa@CANNONINC.COM Thu Jan 31 07:23:41 2008 Return-path: Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKYSD-0007Mt-5v for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:23:41 -0500 Received: from [89.181.51.162] (helo=[89.181.51.162]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKYSC-0007gX-AQ for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 07:23:41 -0500 Message-ID: <001101c86404$12620680$a847b559@miguelramos> From: "Florin joo" To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: Evenings alone are a thing of the past with your brand new huge d1ck Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:23:23 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C86404.12607FE0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 ----------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C86404.12607FE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A revolutionary medical discovery has been made Find out more here ----------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C86404.12607FE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable A revolutionary medical discovery = has been=20 made Find out more here ----------=_NextPart_000_000D_01C86404.12607FE0-- From simple-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jan 31 09:11:41 2008 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKa8f-0004M5-2Z; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:11:37 -0500 Received: from simple by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1JKa8e-0004Lr-0j for simple-confirm+ok@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:11:36 -0500 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKa8d-0004Lj-N2 for simple@ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:11:35 -0500 Received: from oslproxyp1.tandberg.com ([194.0.215.2]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKa8d-0006C8-5C for simple@ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:11:35 -0500 Received: from OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int (oslexcp11.eu.tandberg.int [10.47.136.43]) by oslproxyp1.tandberg.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m0VEBLAm014199; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:11:33 +0100 Received: from oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int ([10.47.136.29]) by OSLEXCP11.eu.tandberg.int with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:11:03 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Simple] Re: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 15:14:49 +0100 Message-ID: <9F6ACAE02B6DD040A1E259977622CFDB0161E5D7@oslexcp1.eu.tandberg.int> In-Reply-To: <002e01c86397$4ba49d30$e2edd790$@com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Simple] Re: I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00.txt Thread-Index: Achjl0t2/mSzUFFBRneN8s02hY2skAAfBqdw References: <002e01c86397$4ba49d30$e2edd790$@com> From: "Geir Arne Sandbakken" To: "Paul E. Jones" , "Simple WG" X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Jan 2008 14:11:03.0953 (UTC) FILETIME=[1D582010:01C86413] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.62 on 194.0.215.2 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a Cc: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gunnar_Hellstr=F6m?= , Gregg Vanderheiden X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: simple-bounces@ietf.org I think it's a good idea. Geir Arne > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul E. Jones [mailto:paulej@packetizer.com] > Sent: 31. januar 2008 00:25 > To: 'Simple WG' > Cc: 'Gunnar Hellstr=F6m'; 'Gregg Vanderheiden' > Subject: [Simple] Re: = I-DAction:draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission- > 00.txt >=20 > Folks, >=20 > During the middle of the month, there was a little discussion on the = draft > draft-hellstrom-simple-text-transmission-00. As discussed, this draft = is > intended to provide a means of enabling real-time text transmission = between > devices using MSRP. >=20 > Looking through the discussion that took place, I believe the only = concern > was that an MSRP relay might collect several text chunks and combine = that, > thus effectively breaking RTT communication. That's true and we = cannot > prevent it, but as Gunnar highlighted, there is an attribute included = that > provides a hint to relays that immediate delivery is required. We may = need > a stronger hint and/or means to select MSRP relays that will deliver = the > functionality we need. >=20 > Were there any other concerns? >=20 > While there are certainly issues we need to address (and several noted = in > the initial draft), we wanted to put this before the group to try to = build > consensus for this general direction. It seems that there was support = for > this idea (and no objection that I could see). As such, would be = acceptable > to the group to make this a work item and begin actively progressing = the > draft within SIMPLE? >=20 > Thanks, > Paul >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Simple mailing list > Simple@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple _______________________________________________ Simple mailing list Simple@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple From _llirtemo@advancedpatienttransportation.com Thu Jan 31 14:16:23 2008 Return-path: <_llirtemo@advancedpatienttransportation.com> Received: from [10.90.34.44] (helo=chiedprmail1.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKetb-0001oc-KY for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:16:23 -0500 Received: from host32-228-dynamic.4-87-r.retail.telecomitalia.it ([87.4.228.32]) by chiedprmail1.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JKetb-0006Gi-1g for simple-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 14:16:23 -0500 Message-ID: <000f01c8643d$c451b190$20e40457@nome80b5784770> From: "Rony Guindon" <_llirtemo@advancedpatienttransportation.com> To: simple-archive@lists.ietf.org Subject: A whole new exciting S3x Life awaits you Here Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 20:16:22 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C86446.26161990" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 X-Spam-Score: 2.4 (++) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 ----------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C86446.26161990 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Get all the hot women you want with your new legendary c0ck ----------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C86446.26161990 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Get all the hot women you want with = your new=20 legendary c0ck ----------=_NextPart_000_000B_01C86446.26161990-- From RichiebasicSosa@readwriteweb.com Thu Jan 31 17:26:51 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-simple-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-simple-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C4A028C1FA; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:26:51 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 25.681 X-Spam-Level: ************************* X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=25.681 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=0.992, DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS=1.13, DOS_OE_TO_MX=2.75, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FH_HOST_EQ_VERIZON_P=2.144, HELO_LH_HOME=3.714, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, HTML_MESSAGE=1, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 3.7 HELO_LH_HOME HELO_LH_HOME * 2.1 FH_HOST_EQ_VERIZON_P Host is pool-.+verizon.net * 0.8 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d * 1.0 DATE_IN_PAST_12_24 Date: is 12 to 24 hours before Received: date * 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 1.1 DNS_FROM_OPENWHOIS RBL: Envelope sender listed in bl.open-whois.org. * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [71.243.223.13 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 3.0 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [71.243.223.13 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS * 0.3 HOST_MISMATCH_NET HOST_MISMATCH_NET * 2.8 DOS_OE_TO_MX Delivered direct to MX with OE headers Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zQZ29+mVJ0Kh; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:26:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from rick.home (pool-71-243-223-13.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [71.243.223.13]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 00BB328C287; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 17:25:40 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <0d5001c86471$96249100$0201a8c0@Rick> From: "Dario Delacruz" To: Cc: , " =20
We told you to keep = watching, G &=20 S Minerals... Symol : GSML

Gold is reaching = record of $1000/=20 oz ... GSML is the undiscovered gem you should be invested=20 in.

Up 4 straight days with = record=20 volume

If you missed the move = from .13 to .17=20 dont dispair they have not even scratched the surfact.

This company is going to=20 $3.00

So grab yourself = some GSML and=20 earn easy 10 bagger

------=_NextPart_000_0D4C_01C86471.96249100-- From takako.hozu@bookemagency.com Thu Jan 31 22:45:54 2008 Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietfarch-simple-archive@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietfarch-simple-archive@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7EA03A6822 for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:45:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: YES X-Spam-Score: 51.164 X-Spam-Level: *************************************************** X-Spam-Status: Yes, score=51.164 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_99=3.5, FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D=1.597, FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D=0.765, FM_DDDD_TIMES_2=1.999, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=2.426, NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP=0.001, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100=0.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100=1.5, RAZOR2_CHECK=0.5, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET=1.96, RCVD_IN_PBL=0.905, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=0.877, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.033, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.1, STOX_REPLY_TYPE=0.001, URIBL_BLACK=20, URIBL_WS_SURBL=10] X-Spam-Report: * 3.5 BAYES_99 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 99 to 100% * [score: 1.0000] * 0.8 FH_HOST_EQ_D_D_D_D Host starts with d-d-d-d * 2.4 HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR Relay HELO'd using suspicious hostname (IP addr * 1) * 1.6 FH_HELO_EQ_D_D_D_D Helo is d-d-d-d * 0.0 STOX_REPLY_TYPE STOX_REPLY_TYPE * 0.0 NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP URI: Uses a dotted-decimal IP address in URL * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E8_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 8 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 100] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CHECK Listed in Razor2 (http://razor.sf.net/) * 1.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_E4_51_100 Razor2 gives engine 4 confidence level * above 50% * [cf: 93] * 0.5 RAZOR2_CF_RANGE_51_100 Razor2 gives confidence level above 50% * [cf: 100] * 20 URIBL_BLACK Contains an URL listed in the URIBL blacklist * [URIs: 24.33.235.192] * 10 URIBL_WS_SURBL Contains an URL listed in the WS SURBL blocklist * [URIs: 24.33.235.192] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [86.137.180.112 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] * 2.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 0.9 RCVD_IN_PBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus PBL * [86.137.180.112 listed in zen.spamhaus.org] * 3.0 RCVD_IN_XBL RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus XBL * 2.0 FM_DDDD_TIMES_2 Dual helo + host eq d_d_d_d * 0.1 RDNS_DYNAMIC Delivered to trusted network by host with * dynamic-looking rDNS Received: from core3.amsl.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rfkgz9wmW8sG for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:45:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from host86-137-180-112.range86-137.btcentralplus.com (host86-137-180-112.range86-137.btcentralplus.com [86.137.180.112]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 8D1E23A67CF for ; Thu, 31 Jan 2008 22:45:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from [198.119.50.72] (helo=abfa) by host86-137-180-112.range86-137.btcentralplus.com with smtp (Exim 4.62 (FreeBSD)) id 1JLXhT-0003Gt-8Y; Fri, 1 Feb 2008 06:48:00 +0000 Message-ID: <001401c8649e$533ff550$483277c6@abfa> From: To: Subject: ***SPAM*** 51.164 (5) Last Night Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 06:47:34 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="windows-1250"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 You're in my Soul http://24.33.235.192/