From: webmaster at knowledgeautomation.com (Marc Clifton) Date: Thu Sep 16 09:16:38 2004 Subject: Request For Registration of Media Type Message-ID: <410AF338.7000104@knowledgeautomation.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-types/attachments/20040731/146c5a21/attachment.htm >From iana@iana.org Wed Jul 7 06:55:18 2004 From: iana at iana.org (iana@iana.org) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] Message-ID: <200407070455.i674tIX12213@santee.icann.org> Thank you for your message. The iana@iana.org address collects a tremendous amount of spam, and we have been forced to implement protective measures. In order to process your message we need to confirm that it came from a real email address. To confirm your message, you can either: 1) reply to this message, without altering the subject line (the "Re: " added by many mail clients is OK). or 2) visit the URL For your reference, the subject of the message you sent was: "Ietf-types" and it arrived at IANA approximately at Tue Jul 6 21:55:18 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------- ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] 1 From: webmaster at knowledgeautomation.com (Marc Clifton) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:47 2006 Subject: Request For Registration of Media Type Message-ID: <410AF338.7000104@knowledgeautomation.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-types/attachments/20040731/146c5a21/attachment.html From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type application/vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E293E@hrtades2.atea.be> Name : Olivier Biot Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com MIME media type name : Application MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Required parameters : none Optional parameters : none Encoding considerations : binary This media type is 8-bit binary by design, hence it may require encoding on transports not capable of handling binary. The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character encoding used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of the binary data and must not be specified with a charset parameter. Security considerations : The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain executable code and user confidential information. The associated media type does not provide mechanisms for detection and prevention of eavesdropping, spoofing and tampering. In situations where tampering, eavesdropping and spoofing are possible and may cause problems, it is advised to use a secure transport protocol (such as HTTP over TLS), and/or to use a safe integrity verification mechanism (such as digital signing of the body). Interoperability considerations : The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. This media type contains headers and a SMS message body. The headers specify among others how the message body has to be interpreted. The message body can for example be a text message, but also a WAP Push message or an Enhanced Message Service (EMS) message for example. In order to be interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a Content-Type header identifies the data type. Published specification : ETSI TS 123 040 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040. Note that both specifications follow a similar versioning system. For instance, ETSI TS 123 040 V4.6.0 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040 V4.6.0. The ETSI specifications can be retrieved from http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (Search for "TS 123 040" and tick "Standard Type and Doc Number" for the search query). The 3GPP specifications can be retrieved from http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ (choose matching 3GPP and ETSI version). Applications which use this media : Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, download etc.). Additional information : This (binary) media type is not intended for file storage. 1. Magic number(s) : n/a 2. File extension(s) : n/a 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a 4. Object Identifiers: n/a Person to contact for further information : 1. Name : Olivier Biot 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com Intended usage : Common The Short Messaging Service (SMS) is a very common messaging service available on most mobile networks. SMS is not limited to the popular transport of text-only messages. The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be delivered independent of the transport network. Author/Change controller : 3GPP/ETSI The SMS-TL specifications are written and maintained by 3GPP and ETSI. From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2939@hrtades2.atea.be> |From: Martin Duerst | | |At 11:52 04/07/28 +0200, Biot Olivier wrote: | |>The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however |the character set |>used in such an SMS message (including the message text |itself) is part of |>the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. | |Thanks for the clarification. Apart from the change suggested by Ned, |I would change "character set" to "character encoding". I agree. |I would also be interested to know (doesn't necessarily need to show |up in the registration) what kind of encodings are supported. For |example, does SMS allow message text to be encoded in an Unicode- |based encoding? Are all the encodings supported registered as |IANA 'charset's, or are there others? According to 3GPP TS 23.038 (alphabets and language-specific information), the GSM SMS data coding allows GSM 7-bit alphabet (which allows to stuff up to 160 characters in 140 bytes), 8-bit data and 16-bit Unicode UCS-2 character encoding. The used data coding is encoded in binary fashion in the GSM SMS "data coding scheme", and has no relationship with (read: does not use) the "charset" tokens registered at IANA (although the used character encodings are identical). Best regards, Olivier From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl In-Reply-To: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040729074741.05069e18@localhost> At 11:52 04/07/28 +0200, Biot Olivier wrote: >The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character set >used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of >the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. Thanks for the clarification. Apart from the change suggested by Ned, I would change "character set" to "character encoding". I would also be interested to know (doesn't necessarily need to show up in the registration) what kind of encodings are supported. For example, does SMS allow message text to be encoded in an Unicode- based encoding? Are all the encodings supported registered as IANA 'charset's, or are there others? Regards, Martin. From: ned.freed at mrochek.com (ned.freed@mrochek.com) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:52:21 +0200" <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> References: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <01LCZJHVJ86K00005R@mauve.mrochek.com> > Hi list, > Many thanks to all for your valuable review input. Please find an updated > MIME media type registration application for "application/vnd.3gpp.sms-tl". > I think I dealt with all the issues raised during the review. > Please let me know if the application below is OK! Couple of minor typos noted below; otherwise it looks fine to me. Ned > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Name : Olivier Biot > Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > MIME media type name : Application > MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl > Required parameters : none > Optional parameters : none > Encoding considerations : binary > This media type is 8-bit binary by design, hence it may require encoding on > transports not capable of handling binary. > The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character set > used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of > the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. ^^^a > Security considerations : > The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain > executable code and user confidential information. > The associated media type does not foresee mechanisms for detection and ^^^^^^^provide > prevention of eavesdropping, spoofing and tampering. In situations where > tampering, eavesdropping and spoofing are possible and may cause problems, > it is advised to use a secure transport protocol (such as HTTP over TLS), > and/or to use a safe integrity verification mechanism (such as digital > signing of the body). > Interoperability considerations : > The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short > Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and > some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. > This media type contains headers and a SMS message body. The headers specify > among others how the message body has to be interpreted. The message body > can for example be a text message, but also a WAP Push message or an > Enhanced Message Service (EMS) message for example. In order to be > interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an > envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a > Content-Type header identifies the data type. > Published specification : > ETSI TS 123 040 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040. Note that > both specifications follow a similar versioning system. For instance, ETSI > TS 123 040 V4.6.0 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040 V4.6.0. > The ETSI specifications can be retrieved from > http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (Search for "TS 123 040" and tick > "Standard Type and Doc Number" for the search query). > The 3GPP specifications can be retrieved from > http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ (choose matching > 3GPP and ETSI version). > Applications which use this media : > Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, > download etc.). > Additional information : > This (binary) media type is not intended for file storage. > 1. Magic number(s) : n/a > 2. File extension(s) : n/a > 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a > 4. Object Identifiers: n/a > Person to contact for further information : > 1. Name : Olivier Biot > 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > Intended usage : Common > The Short Messaging Service (SMS) is a very common messaging service > available on most mobile networks. SMS is not limited to the popular > transport of text-only messages. > The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be > delivered independent of the transport network. > Author/Change controller : 3GPP/ETSI > The SMS-TL specifications are written and maintained by 3GPP and ETSI. From: Alfred.S.Gilman at ieee.org (Al Gilman) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:47 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration ofapplication/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728143604.0570ae78@localhost> References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> <4.2.0.58.J.20040728143604.0570ae78@localhost> Message-ID: At 3:03 PM +0900 7/28/04, Martin Duerst wrote: >At 13:05 04/07/27 -0700, RJ Auburn wrote: > >>On 07/21/2004 22:03, "Larry Masinter" wrote: >> >>> These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type >>> registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this >>> particular registration: >> >> >>Martin: Would you be the person to handle/address the general issues? > >Yes. For everybody's information, RJ is following the procedure laid >out at http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype.html#Planned. >Because he is the first to do so, this is a very good case to see >where we have to tweak that description. I have already made two >additions: >1) Added a sentence "Make sure that this part of the specification > is readable on its own, without the context of the specification." > [for further details, a good example is probably better than a > lot of explanations] >2) Added a sentence "To make it easier for your WG to track comments > on the Media Type section, you may cross-post the comments list > for your specification." > [I want to leave this to the group for the moment. They have to > show that they addressed comments to the IESG, so having that > documented in a last call table may have advantages and > disadvantages.] > >Also, I'm planning to add some pointers to examples to the above >description, once we have them. That should make it easier for >others to do this. > >> > Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks >>> before heading lines, which made your template hard >>> to read. >> >>If needed I can resubmit a nicer looking version. Let me know... > >I guess that can wait for the next time you send something anyway, >but I hope this will be soon. > >> >> Published specification: >>>> >>>> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >>>> described by this specification. >>> >>> I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect >>> if the template were to appear elsewhere to see >>> a bibliographic citation, e.g., >>> >>> "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C >>> Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, >>> >>> Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise >>> enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines >>> many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to >>> say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that >>> conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and >>> interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. >> >> >>Pointing at the schema/dtd sections seems reasonable. How is this for text: >> >>Published specification: >> This media type registration is for XML bodies that >> conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and >> interpreted by the rules this specification > >'this specification' -> 'of this specification' > >> >> Person & email address to contact for further information: >>>> >>>> RJ Auburn, . >>> >>> Should there be a W3C contact as well? >> >> >>Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? > >Adding the name of a staff contact or so might be a good idea. > >> >> Intended usage: >>>> >>>> COMMON >>>> Author/Change controller: >>>> >>>> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web >>> Consortium's >>>> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these >>>> specifications. >>> >>> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. >> >>Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? > >The W3C is 'on the Web', not at a particular physical location. >This kind of wording has been used in some previous registrations, >and should be okay. Actually, Martin, the W3C should come up with something better. This is a detail of the "life after Rec[ommendation status is achieved]" that I am not aware we have laid out adequately. There is a slight problem because the W3C has studiously avoided being a legal entity which could be identified in standard X.500 terms. But if we take the specification http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2004JulSep/0075.html The document identifies a contact address of mailto:www-dom@w3.org This is standard practice, viz: Do you have a technical comment? W3C technical reports include email addresses where readers should send technical comments. The Consortium has also assiduously avoided promising to answer questions about its utterances, other than that one may post 'comments' in the above manner. Clearly a 'comment' alleging that there is an inconsistency in the provisions of a specification, if read and found to be accurate, may result in something being added to the errata for a document. I would suggest that the 'comments to' email address be included in the contact information provided in a MIME type registration request. As far as identifying The Consortium it should suffice to use the URI http://www.w3.org/ as identification in this context. It would be helpful, but probably not required by the IETF pro-formas, to also allude to the process for change control by a reference to the W3C Process Document identified as: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/ Al >Regards, Martin. From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of applicati on/ccxml+xml Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2933@hrtades2.atea.be> |From: RJ Auburn | | |Chris: | |Comments and replies are inline. Let me know if there are any |other issues: | | |On 07/22/2004 11:05, Chris Lilley wrote: [...] |> When citing an RFC abcd, it is useful to do a Google search for |> "Obsoletes: abcd" and "Updates: abcd" because RFCs do not |have 'latest |> version' URIs (or indeed canonical URIs at all). | |Thanks for the tip... You get this information "for free" if you head to the RFC Editor (http://www.rfc-editor.org/), choose "RFC Search" and type your RFC number in the query form. You even get a list of known errata if applicable. Best regards, Olivier Biot From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> Hi list, Many thanks to all for your valuable review input. Please find an updated MIME media type registration application for "application/vnd.3gpp.sms-tl". I think I dealt with all the issues raised during the review. Please let me know if the application below is OK! Best regards, Olivier Biot ------------------------------------------------------------ Name : Olivier Biot Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com MIME media type name : Application MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Required parameters : none Optional parameters : none Encoding considerations : binary This media type is 8-bit binary by design, hence it may require encoding on transports not capable of handling binary. The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character set used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. Security considerations : The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain executable code and user confidential information. The associated media type does not foresee mechanisms for detection and prevention of eavesdropping, spoofing and tampering. In situations where tampering, eavesdropping and spoofing are possible and may cause problems, it is advised to use a secure transport protocol (such as HTTP over TLS), and/or to use a safe integrity verification mechanism (such as digital signing of the body). Interoperability considerations : The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. This media type contains headers and a SMS message body. The headers specify among others how the message body has to be interpreted. The message body can for example be a text message, but also a WAP Push message or an Enhanced Message Service (EMS) message for example. In order to be interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a Content-Type header identifies the data type. Published specification : ETSI TS 123 040 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040. Note that both specifications follow a similar versioning system. For instance, ETSI TS 123 040 V4.6.0 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040 V4.6.0. The ETSI specifications can be retrieved from http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (Search for "TS 123 040" and tick "Standard Type and Doc Number" for the search query). The 3GPP specifications can be retrieved from http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ (choose matching 3GPP and ETSI version). Applications which use this media : Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, download etc.). Additional information : This (binary) media type is not intended for file storage. 1. Magic number(s) : n/a 2. File extension(s) : n/a 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a 4. Object Identifiers: n/a Person to contact for further information : 1. Name : Olivier Biot 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com Intended usage : Common The Short Messaging Service (SMS) is a very common messaging service available on most mobile networks. SMS is not limited to the popular transport of text-only messages. The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be delivered independent of the transport network. Author/Change controller : 3GPP/ETSI The SMS-TL specifications are written and maintained by 3GPP and ETSI. From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration ofapplication/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728143604.0570ae78@localhost> At 13:05 04/07/27 -0700, RJ Auburn wrote: >On 07/21/2004 22:03, "Larry Masinter" wrote: > > > These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type > > registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this > > particular registration: > > >Martin: Would you be the person to handle/address the general issues? Yes. For everybody's information, RJ is following the procedure laid out at http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype.html#Planned. Because he is the first to do so, this is a very good case to see where we have to tweak that description. I have already made two additions: 1) Added a sentence "Make sure that this part of the specification is readable on its own, without the context of the specification." [for further details, a good example is probably better than a lot of explanations] 2) Added a sentence "To make it easier for your WG to track comments on the Media Type section, you may cross-post the comments list for your specification." [I want to leave this to the group for the moment. They have to show that they addressed comments to the IESG, so having that documented in a last call table may have advantages and disadvantages.] Also, I'm planning to add some pointers to examples to the above description, once we have them. That should make it easier for others to do this. > > Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks > > before heading lines, which made your template hard > > to read. > >If needed I can resubmit a nicer looking version. Let me know... I guess that can wait for the next time you send something anyway, but I hope this will be soon. > >> Published specification: > >> > >> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as > >> described by this specification. > > > > I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect > > if the template were to appear elsewhere to see > > a bibliographic citation, e.g., > > > > "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C > > Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, > > > > Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise > > enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines > > many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to > > say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that > > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > > interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. > > >Pointing at the schema/dtd sections seems reasonable. How is this for text: > >Published specification: > This media type registration is for XML bodies that > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > interpreted by the rules this specification 'this specification' -> 'of this specification' > >> Person & email address to contact for further information: > >> > >> RJ Auburn, . > > > > Should there be a W3C contact as well? > > >Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? Adding the name of a staff contact or so might be a good idea. > >> Intended usage: > >> > >> COMMON > >> Author/Change controller: > >> > >> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web > > Consortium's > >> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these > >> specifications. > > > > Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. > >Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? The W3C is 'on the Web', not at a particular physical location. This kind of wording has been used in some previous registrations, and should be okay. Regards, Martin. From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Wed Jul 28 08:04:33 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration ofapplication/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: References: <3310006012.20040722200532@w3.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728144733.0570d3d8@localhost> At 14:37 04/07/27 -0700, RJ Auburn wrote: >Chris: > >Comments and replies are inline. Let me know if there are any other issues: > > >On 07/22/2004 11:05, "Chris Lilley" wrote: > > I agree that this sort of context, although obvious when the W3C > > document as a whole is studies, is fairly opaque when a single appendix > > is extracted and sent as an email message. > > > > Prepending the 'Abstract' of the specification, and giving a link to the > > full specification, would be helpful. > > >Sorry. I should have done this. >Martin: any chance we could update the w3c page with some examples of what >should be sent to this list? I think it might be helpful to have some >pointers to good example requests. Yes. For that, we first have to have good examples. I'm looking forward to use your next mail to this list as such an example. > >>> Published specification: > >>> > >>> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as > >>> described by this specification. > > > > 'This specification' should be a link to the main page of the document, > > even if that is a link to itself for a short document, and inline URIs > > should be indicated in the ascii text version by a numbered link [1] > > > > [1] http://example.org/like/this > >This section now reads: > >Published specification: > > This media type registration is for XML bodies that > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > interpreted by the rules of the CCXML specification [1]. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/tr/ccxml/ I personally think that this kind of '[1]' citation is a bit of overkill. If you get that from a text conversion on the W3C Web site, feel free to use it. But I think something like This media type registration is for XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules of the CCXML specification at http://www.w3.org/tr/ccxml/. is more readable, and more popular in plain text formats such as email. >Ok, this is what it will look like now: > >Magic number(s): > >There is no single initial octet sequence that is always present in CCXML >documents. This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as >indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect CCXML by its namespace URI, >http://www.w3.org/2002/09/ccxml > >Is this ok with folks? Okay with me. Regards, Martin. >From Olivier.Biot@siemens.com Wed Jul 28 11:52:21 2004 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Wed Jul 28 11:52:26 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> Hi list, Many thanks to all for your valuable review input. Please find an updated MIME media type registration application for "application/vnd.3gpp.sms-tl". I think I dealt with all the issues raised during the review. Please let me know if the application below is OK! Best regards, Olivier Biot ------------------------------------------------------------ Name : Olivier Biot Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com MIME media type name : Application MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Required parameters : none Optional parameters : none Encoding considerations : binary This media type is 8-bit binary by design, hence it may require encoding on transports not capable of handling binary. The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character set used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. Security considerations : The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain executable code and user confidential information. The associated media type does not foresee mechanisms for detection and prevention of eavesdropping, spoofing and tampering. In situations where tampering, eavesdropping and spoofing are possible and may cause problems, it is advised to use a secure transport protocol (such as HTTP over TLS), and/or to use a safe integrity verification mechanism (such as digital signing of the body). Interoperability considerations : The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. This media type contains headers and a SMS message body. The headers specify among others how the message body has to be interpreted. The message body can for example be a text message, but also a WAP Push message or an Enhanced Message Service (EMS) message for example. In order to be interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a Content-Type header identifies the data type. Published specification : ETSI TS 123 040 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040. Note that both specifications follow a similar versioning system. For instance, ETSI TS 123 040 V4.6.0 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040 V4.6.0. The ETSI specifications can be retrieved from http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (Search for "TS 123 040" and tick "Standard Type and Doc Number" for the search query). The 3GPP specifications can be retrieved from http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ (choose matching 3GPP and ETSI version). Applications which use this media : Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, download etc.). Additional information : This (binary) media type is not intended for file storage. 1. Magic number(s) : n/a 2. File extension(s) : n/a 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a 4. Object Identifiers: n/a Person to contact for further information : 1. Name : Olivier Biot 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com Intended usage : Common The Short Messaging Service (SMS) is a very common messaging service available on most mobile networks. SMS is not limited to the popular transport of text-only messages. The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be delivered independent of the transport network. Author/Change controller : 3GPP/ETSI The SMS-TL specifications are written and maintained by 3GPP and ETSI. >From Olivier.Biot@siemens.com Wed Jul 28 12:00:48 2004 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Wed Jul 28 12:01:03 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of applicati on/ccxml+xml Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2933@hrtades2.atea.be> |From: RJ Auburn | | |Chris: | |Comments and replies are inline. Let me know if there are any |other issues: | | |On 07/22/2004 11:05, Chris Lilley wrote: [...] |> When citing an RFC abcd, it is useful to do a Google search for |> "Obsoletes: abcd" and "Updates: abcd" because RFCs do not |have 'latest |> version' URIs (or indeed canonical URIs at all). | |Thanks for the tip... You get this information "for free" if you head to the RFC Editor (http://www.rfc-editor.org/), choose "RFC Search" and type your RFC number in the query form. You even get a list of known errata if applicable. Best regards, Olivier Biot >From ned.freed@mrochek.com Wed Jul 28 16:34:26 2004 From: ned.freed at mrochek.com (ned.freed@mrochek.com) Date: Wed Jul 28 16:36:38 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Wed, 28 Jul 2004 11:52:21 +0200" <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> References: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <01LCZJHVJ86K00005R@mauve.mrochek.com> > Hi list, > Many thanks to all for your valuable review input. Please find an updated > MIME media type registration application for "application/vnd.3gpp.sms-tl". > I think I dealt with all the issues raised during the review. > Please let me know if the application below is OK! Couple of minor typos noted below; otherwise it looks fine to me. Ned > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Name : Olivier Biot > Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > MIME media type name : Application > MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl > Required parameters : none > Optional parameters : none > Encoding considerations : binary > This media type is 8-bit binary by design, hence it may require encoding on > transports not capable of handling binary. > The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character set > used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of > the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. ^^^a > Security considerations : > The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain > executable code and user confidential information. > The associated media type does not foresee mechanisms for detection and ^^^^^^^provide > prevention of eavesdropping, spoofing and tampering. In situations where > tampering, eavesdropping and spoofing are possible and may cause problems, > it is advised to use a secure transport protocol (such as HTTP over TLS), > and/or to use a safe integrity verification mechanism (such as digital > signing of the body). > Interoperability considerations : > The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short > Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and > some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. > This media type contains headers and a SMS message body. The headers specify > among others how the message body has to be interpreted. The message body > can for example be a text message, but also a WAP Push message or an > Enhanced Message Service (EMS) message for example. In order to be > interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an > envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a > Content-Type header identifies the data type. > Published specification : > ETSI TS 123 040 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040. Note that > both specifications follow a similar versioning system. For instance, ETSI > TS 123 040 V4.6.0 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040 V4.6.0. > The ETSI specifications can be retrieved from > http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (Search for "TS 123 040" and tick > "Standard Type and Doc Number" for the search query). > The 3GPP specifications can be retrieved from > http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ (choose matching > 3GPP and ETSI version). > Applications which use this media : > Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, > download etc.). > Additional information : > This (binary) media type is not intended for file storage. > 1. Magic number(s) : n/a > 2. File extension(s) : n/a > 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a > 4. Object Identifiers: n/a > Person to contact for further information : > 1. Name : Olivier Biot > 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > Intended usage : Common > The Short Messaging Service (SMS) is a very common messaging service > available on most mobile networks. SMS is not limited to the popular > transport of text-only messages. > The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be > delivered independent of the transport network. > Author/Change controller : 3GPP/ETSI > The SMS-TL specifications are written and maintained by 3GPP and ETSI. >From duerst@w3.org Thu Jul 29 08:33:22 2004 From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Thu Jul 29 08:33:33 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl In-Reply-To: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2932@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040729074741.05069e18@localhost> At 11:52 04/07/28 +0200, Biot Olivier wrote: >The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character set >used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of >the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. Thanks for the clarification. Apart from the change suggested by Ned, I would change "character set" to "character encoding". I would also be interested to know (doesn't necessarily need to show up in the registration) what kind of encodings are supported. For example, does SMS allow message text to be encoded in an Unicode- based encoding? Are all the encodings supported registered as IANA 'charset's, or are there others? Regards, Martin. >From Olivier.Biot@siemens.com Thu Jul 29 11:50:36 2004 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Thu Jul 29 11:50:41 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2939@hrtades2.atea.be> |From: Martin Duerst | | |At 11:52 04/07/28 +0200, Biot Olivier wrote: | |>The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however |the character set |>used in such an SMS message (including the message text |itself) is part of |>the binary data and must not be specified with the charset parameter. | |Thanks for the clarification. Apart from the change suggested by Ned, |I would change "character set" to "character encoding". I agree. |I would also be interested to know (doesn't necessarily need to show |up in the registration) what kind of encodings are supported. For |example, does SMS allow message text to be encoded in an Unicode- |based encoding? Are all the encodings supported registered as |IANA 'charset's, or are there others? According to 3GPP TS 23.038 (alphabets and language-specific information), the GSM SMS data coding allows GSM 7-bit alphabet (which allows to stuff up to 160 characters in 140 bytes), 8-bit data and 16-bit Unicode UCS-2 character encoding. The used data coding is encoded in binary fashion in the GSM SMS "data coding scheme", and has no relationship with (read: does not use) the "charset" tokens registered at IANA (although the used character encodings are identical). Best regards, Olivier >From Olivier.Biot@siemens.com Thu Jul 29 16:53:41 2004 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Thu Jul 29 16:53:55 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type application/vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E293E@hrtades2.atea.be> Name : Olivier Biot Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com MIME media type name : Application MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Required parameters : none Optional parameters : none Encoding considerations : binary This media type is 8-bit binary by design, hence it may require encoding on transports not capable of handling binary. The SMS service allows transport of text messages; however the character encoding used in such an SMS message (including the message text itself) is part of the binary data and must not be specified with a charset parameter. Security considerations : The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain executable code and user confidential information. The associated media type does not provide mechanisms for detection and prevention of eavesdropping, spoofing and tampering. In situations where tampering, eavesdropping and spoofing are possible and may cause problems, it is advised to use a secure transport protocol (such as HTTP over TLS), and/or to use a safe integrity verification mechanism (such as digital signing of the body). Interoperability considerations : The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. This media type contains headers and a SMS message body. The headers specify among others how the message body has to be interpreted. The message body can for example be a text message, but also a WAP Push message or an Enhanced Message Service (EMS) message for example. In order to be interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a Content-Type header identifies the data type. Published specification : ETSI TS 123 040 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040. Note that both specifications follow a similar versioning system. For instance, ETSI TS 123 040 V4.6.0 is the technical realization of 3GPP TS 23.040 V4.6.0. The ETSI specifications can be retrieved from http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (Search for "TS 123 040" and tick "Standard Type and Doc Number" for the search query). The 3GPP specifications can be retrieved from http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ (choose matching 3GPP and ETSI version). Applications which use this media : Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, download etc.). Additional information : This (binary) media type is not intended for file storage. 1. Magic number(s) : n/a 2. File extension(s) : n/a 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a 4. Object Identifiers: n/a Person to contact for further information : 1. Name : Olivier Biot 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com Intended usage : Common The Short Messaging Service (SMS) is a very common messaging service available on most mobile networks. SMS is not limited to the popular transport of text-only messages. The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be delivered independent of the transport network. Author/Change controller : 3GPP/ETSI The SMS-TL specifications are written and maintained by 3GPP and ETSI. >From Alfred.S.Gilman@ieee.org Wed Jul 28 13:54:51 2004 From: Alfred.S.Gilman at ieee.org (Al Gilman) Date: Thu Sep 16 09:16:34 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration ofapplication/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728143604.0570ae78@localhost> References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> <4.2.0.58.J.20040728143604.0570ae78@localhost> Message-ID: At 3:03 PM +0900 7/28/04, Martin Duerst wrote: >At 13:05 04/07/27 -0700, RJ Auburn wrote: > >>On 07/21/2004 22:03, "Larry Masinter" wrote: >> >>> These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type >>> registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this >>> particular registration: >> >> >>Martin: Would you be the person to handle/address the general issues? > >Yes. For everybody's information, RJ is following the procedure laid >out at http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype.html#Planned. >Because he is the first to do so, this is a very good case to see >where we have to tweak that description. I have already made two >additions: >1) Added a sentence "Make sure that this part of the specification > is readable on its own, without the context of the specification." > [for further details, a good example is probably better than a > lot of explanations] >2) Added a sentence "To make it easier for your WG to track comments > on the Media Type section, you may cross-post the comments list > for your specification." > [I want to leave this to the group for the moment. They have to > show that they addressed comments to the IESG, so having that > documented in a last call table may have advantages and > disadvantages.] > >Also, I'm planning to add some pointers to examples to the above >description, once we have them. That should make it easier for >others to do this. > >> > Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks >>> before heading lines, which made your template hard >>> to read. >> >>If needed I can resubmit a nicer looking version. Let me know... > >I guess that can wait for the next time you send something anyway, >but I hope this will be soon. > >> >> Published specification: >>>> >>>> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >>>> described by this specification. >>> >>> I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect >>> if the template were to appear elsewhere to see >>> a bibliographic citation, e.g., >>> >>> "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C >>> Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, >>> >>> Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise >>> enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines >>> many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to >>> say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that >>> conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and >>> interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. >> >> >>Pointing at the schema/dtd sections seems reasonable. How is this for text: >> >>Published specification: >> This media type registration is for XML bodies that >> conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and >> interpreted by the rules this specification > >'this specification' -> 'of this specification' > >> >> Person & email address to contact for further information: >>>> >>>> RJ Auburn, . >>> >>> Should there be a W3C contact as well? >> >> >>Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? > >Adding the name of a staff contact or so might be a good idea. > >> >> Intended usage: >>>> >>>> COMMON >>>> Author/Change controller: >>>> >>>> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web >>> Consortium's >>>> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these >>>> specifications. >>> >>> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. >> >>Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? > >The W3C is 'on the Web', not at a particular physical location. >This kind of wording has been used in some previous registrations, >and should be okay. Actually, Martin, the W3C should come up with something better. This is a detail of the "life after Rec[ommendation status is achieved]" that I am not aware we have laid out adequately. There is a slight problem because the W3C has studiously avoided being a legal entity which could be identified in standard X.500 terms. But if we take the specification http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/w3c-wai-pf/2004JulSep/0075.html The document identifies a contact address of mailto:www-dom@w3.org This is standard practice, viz: Do you have a technical comment? W3C technical reports include email addresses where readers should send technical comments. The Consortium has also assiduously avoided promising to answer questions about its utterances, other than that one may post 'comments' in the above manner. Clearly a 'comment' alleging that there is an inconsistency in the provisions of a specification, if read and found to be accurate, may result in something being added to the errata for a document. I would suggest that the 'comments to' email address be included in the contact information provided in a MIME type registration request. As far as identifying The Consortium it should suffice to use the URI http://www.w3.org/ as identification in this context. It would be helpful, but probably not required by the IETF pro-formas, to also allude to the process for change control by a reference to the W3C Process Document identified as: http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process/ Al >Regards, Martin. From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration ofapplication/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: References: <3310006012.20040722200532@w3.org> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728144733.0570d3d8@localhost> At 14:37 04/07/27 -0700, RJ Auburn wrote: >Chris: > >Comments and replies are inline. Let me know if there are any other issues: > > >On 07/22/2004 11:05, "Chris Lilley" wrote: > > I agree that this sort of context, although obvious when the W3C > > document as a whole is studies, is fairly opaque when a single appendix > > is extracted and sent as an email message. > > > > Prepending the 'Abstract' of the specification, and giving a link to the > > full specification, would be helpful. > > >Sorry. I should have done this. >Martin: any chance we could update the w3c page with some examples of what >should be sent to this list? I think it might be helpful to have some >pointers to good example requests. Yes. For that, we first have to have good examples. I'm looking forward to use your next mail to this list as such an example. > >>> Published specification: > >>> > >>> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as > >>> described by this specification. > > > > 'This specification' should be a link to the main page of the document, > > even if that is a link to itself for a short document, and inline URIs > > should be indicated in the ascii text version by a numbered link [1] > > > > [1] http://example.org/like/this > >This section now reads: > >Published specification: > > This media type registration is for XML bodies that > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > interpreted by the rules of the CCXML specification [1]. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/tr/ccxml/ I personally think that this kind of '[1]' citation is a bit of overkill. If you get that from a text conversion on the W3C Web site, feel free to use it. But I think something like This media type registration is for XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules of the CCXML specification at http://www.w3.org/tr/ccxml/. is more readable, and more popular in plain text formats such as email. >Ok, this is what it will look like now: > >Magic number(s): > >There is no single initial octet sequence that is always present in CCXML >documents. This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as >indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect CCXML by its namespace URI, >http://www.w3.org/2002/09/ccxml > >Is this ok with folks? Okay with me. Regards, Martin. From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Wed Jul 28 08:04:06 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl In-Reply-To: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728142500.03951800@localhost> Hello Olivier, At 14:27 04/07/27 +0200, Biot Olivier wrote: >[NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on the 14th of July >from the IANA registration perl script] > >Name : Olivier Biot > >Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > >MIME media type name : Application > >MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl >Encoding considerations : binary >This media type may require encoding on transports not capable of handling >binary. This is okay, but with respect to how characters are encoded, it may mean anything or nothing at all. Can you please add a short section that discusses how character conding is handled? Thanks, Martin. >From duerst@w3.org Wed Jul 28 08:03:56 2004 From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Wed Jul 28 08:04:25 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration ofapplication/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728143604.0570ae78@localhost> At 13:05 04/07/27 -0700, RJ Auburn wrote: >On 07/21/2004 22:03, "Larry Masinter" wrote: > > > These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type > > registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this > > particular registration: > > >Martin: Would you be the person to handle/address the general issues? Yes. For everybody's information, RJ is following the procedure laid out at http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype.html#Planned. Because he is the first to do so, this is a very good case to see where we have to tweak that description. I have already made two additions: 1) Added a sentence "Make sure that this part of the specification is readable on its own, without the context of the specification." [for further details, a good example is probably better than a lot of explanations] 2) Added a sentence "To make it easier for your WG to track comments on the Media Type section, you may cross-post the comments list for your specification." [I want to leave this to the group for the moment. They have to show that they addressed comments to the IESG, so having that documented in a last call table may have advantages and disadvantages.] Also, I'm planning to add some pointers to examples to the above description, once we have them. That should make it easier for others to do this. > > Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks > > before heading lines, which made your template hard > > to read. > >If needed I can resubmit a nicer looking version. Let me know... I guess that can wait for the next time you send something anyway, but I hope this will be soon. > >> Published specification: > >> > >> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as > >> described by this specification. > > > > I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect > > if the template were to appear elsewhere to see > > a bibliographic citation, e.g., > > > > "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C > > Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, > > > > Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise > > enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines > > many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to > > say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that > > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > > interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. > > >Pointing at the schema/dtd sections seems reasonable. How is this for text: > >Published specification: > This media type registration is for XML bodies that > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > interpreted by the rules this specification 'this specification' -> 'of this specification' > >> Person & email address to contact for further information: > >> > >> RJ Auburn, . > > > > Should there be a W3C contact as well? > > >Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? Adding the name of a staff contact or so might be a good idea. > >> Intended usage: > >> > >> COMMON > >> Author/Change controller: > >> > >> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web > > Consortium's > >> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these > >> specifications. > > > > Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. > >Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? The W3C is 'on the Web', not at a particular physical location. This kind of wording has been used in some previous registrations, and should be okay. Regards, Martin. From: duerst at w3.org (Martin Duerst) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl In-Reply-To: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.J.20040728142500.03951800@localhost> Hello Olivier, At 14:27 04/07/27 +0200, Biot Olivier wrote: >[NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on the 14th of July >from the IANA registration perl script] > >Name : Olivier Biot > >Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > >MIME media type name : Application > >MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl >Encoding considerations : binary >This media type may require encoding on transports not capable of handling >binary. This is okay, but with respect to how characters are encoded, it may mean anything or nothing at all. Can you please add a short section that discusses how character conding is handled? Thanks, Martin. From: rj at voxeo.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Tue Jul 27 23:38:02 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <3310006012.20040722200532@w3.org> Message-ID: Chris: Comments and replies are inline. Let me know if there are any other issues: On 07/22/2004 11:05, "Chris Lilley" wrote: > I agree that this sort of context, although obvious when the W3C > document as a whole is studies, is fairly opaque when a single appendix > is extracted and sent as an email message. > > Prepending the 'Abstract' of the specification, and giving a link to the > full specification, would be helpful. Sorry. I should have done this. Martin: any chance we could update the w3c page with some examples of what should be sent to this list? I think it might be helpful to have some pointers to good example requests. > When citing an RFC abcd, it is useful to do a Google search for > "Obsoletes: abcd" and "Updates: abcd" because RFCs do not have 'latest > version' URIs (or indeed canonical URIs at all). Thanks for the tip... >>> Published specification: >>> >>> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >>> described by this specification. > > 'This specification' should be a link to the main page of the document, > even if that is a link to itself for a short document, and inline URIs > should be indicated in the ascii text version by a numbered link [1] > > [1] http://example.org/like/this This section now reads: Published specification: This media type registration is for XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules of the CCXML specification [1]. [1] http://www.w3.org/tr/ccxml/ > A conversion to text can be obtained for any W3C document by appending > ,text to the URI (before any fragment) for example > http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/,text#ccxml-mime-definition > which is redirected to (watch out for line > wrapping): > http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/html2txt?url=http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/#ccxml-mime- > definition Good hint. I did not know that... > LM> I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect > LM> if the template were to appear elsewhere to see > LM> a bibliographic citation, e.g., > > LM> "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C > LM> Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, > > I agree. I will try to do that next time around... > LM> Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise > LM> enough? > > Not when the appendix is transmitted separately, no. Once again apologies... > LM> While this section is titled "Magic number", I think > LM> what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content > LM> is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't > LM> labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace > LM> expected and the likely root XML element name(s). > > Yes, I agrre that this is current good practice. The text in this > registration is fine, but it should add something like: > > This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as > indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect ccXML by its namespace > URI, http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml > > Hmm the revision to RFC 3023 should probably supply suggested > boilerplate for this and, indeed, perhaps a registration template with > the common items for all +xml types. Ok, this is what it will look like now: Magic number(s): There is no single initial octet sequence that is always present in CCXML documents. This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect CCXML by its namespace URI, http://www.w3.org/2002/09/ccxml Is this ok with folks? --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 From: rj at voxeo.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <3310006012.20040722200532@w3.org> Message-ID: Chris: Comments and replies are inline. Let me know if there are any other issues: On 07/22/2004 11:05, "Chris Lilley" wrote: > I agree that this sort of context, although obvious when the W3C > document as a whole is studies, is fairly opaque when a single appendix > is extracted and sent as an email message. > > Prepending the 'Abstract' of the specification, and giving a link to the > full specification, would be helpful. Sorry. I should have done this. Martin: any chance we could update the w3c page with some examples of what should be sent to this list? I think it might be helpful to have some pointers to good example requests. > When citing an RFC abcd, it is useful to do a Google search for > "Obsoletes: abcd" and "Updates: abcd" because RFCs do not have 'latest > version' URIs (or indeed canonical URIs at all). Thanks for the tip... >>> Published specification: >>> >>> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >>> described by this specification. > > 'This specification' should be a link to the main page of the document, > even if that is a link to itself for a short document, and inline URIs > should be indicated in the ascii text version by a numbered link [1] > > [1] http://example.org/like/this This section now reads: Published specification: This media type registration is for XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules of the CCXML specification [1]. [1] http://www.w3.org/tr/ccxml/ > A conversion to text can be obtained for any W3C document by appending > ,text to the URI (before any fragment) for example > http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/,text#ccxml-mime-definition > which is redirected to (watch out for line > wrapping): > http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/html2txt?url=http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/#ccxml-mime- > definition Good hint. I did not know that... > LM> I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect > LM> if the template were to appear elsewhere to see > LM> a bibliographic citation, e.g., > > LM> "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C > LM> Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, > > I agree. I will try to do that next time around... > LM> Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise > LM> enough? > > Not when the appendix is transmitted separately, no. Once again apologies... > LM> While this section is titled "Magic number", I think > LM> what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content > LM> is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't > LM> labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace > LM> expected and the likely root XML element name(s). > > Yes, I agrre that this is current good practice. The text in this > registration is fine, but it should add something like: > > This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as > indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect ccXML by its namespace > URI, http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml > > Hmm the revision to RFC 3023 should probably supply suggested > boilerplate for this and, indeed, perhaps a registration template with > the common items for all +xml types. Ok, this is what it will look like now: Magic number(s): There is no single initial octet sequence that is always present in CCXML documents. This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect CCXML by its namespace URI, http://www.w3.org/2002/09/ccxml Is this ok with folks? --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 From: rj at voxeo.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Tue Jul 27 22:06:20 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: Larry, Thanks for these comments. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on these. I am going to try and address/comment on them can inline: On 07/21/2004 22:03, "Larry Masinter" wrote: > These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type > registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this > particular registration: Martin: Would you be the person to handle/address the general issues? > It might be helpful if the registration template explained > that "ccxml" stood for "Call Control eXtensible Markup Language" > for use in voice browser applications, and that the registration > is in a document intended to become a W3C recommendation. > > I'm not sure this is necessary, but since we're getting > W3C recommendations registering MIME types, I wondered > if making the registration template just a little bit > more explanatory would be useful. Good points. > Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks > before heading lines, which made your template hard > to read. If needed I can resubmit a nicer looking version. Let me know... > Specific comments: > >> this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should >> be considered. > > RFC 1738 has been superseded quite a while ago, by 2396. Thanks. I have updated the document. >> In addition, because of the extensibility features for CCXML, it is > possible >> that "application/ccxml+xml" may describe content that has security >> implications beyond those described here. However, if the processor > follows >> only the normative semantics of this specification, this content will be >> ignored. Only in the case where the processor recognizes and processes the >> additional content, or where further processing of that content is >> dispatched to other processors, would security issues potentially arise. > And >> in that case, they would fall outside the domain of this registration >> document. > > I don't think it's true that it falls outside the domain, > and the argument is just confusing. One major purpose of the > "security considerations" section is to help firewall > and security perimeter vendors decide what they need > to do when they see content marked with this type. > > If receivers are likely to interpret extensions and the > extensions are likely to cause security problems if interpreted, > you should say so. If the document explains, in allowing for > extensions, how to avoid security problems, then say so. Dave/Max: This has to do with the idea of people using name spaces or something like that to put in other markup that's not CCXML. I do not think this really needs to be here. Should I remove this? Or craft something completely new? >> Interoperability considerations: >> >> This specification describes processing semantics that dictate behavior > that >> must be followed when dealing with, among other things, unrecognized >> elements. >> >> Because CCXML is extensible, conferment > > conformant? Fixed... >> "application/ccxml+xml" processors >> can expect that content received is well-formed XML, but it cannot be >> guaranteed that the content is valid CCXML or that the processor will >> recognize all of the elements and attributes in the document. > > > I think the main purpose of "interoperability considerations" is > to talk about reasons why multiple implementations might not > interoperate. I don't know if you have any of those, but > I don't think what you say here (that someone might send > non-conformant content labeled with this MIME type) > really fits. Are all conforming CCXML implementations guaranteed > to be interoperable? If not, why not? There are a number of features that are considered optional in the specification. Do we need to put something about them here? >> Published specification: >> >> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >> described by this specification. > > I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect > if the template were to appear elsewhere to see > a bibliographic citation, e.g., > > "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C > Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, > > Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise > enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines > many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to > say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. Pointing at the schema/dtd sections seems reasonable. How is this for text: Published specification: This media type registration is for XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules this specification >> Additional information: >> Magic number(s): >> >> There is no single initial octet sequence that is always >> present in CCXML documents. > > While this section is titled "Magic number", I think > what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content > is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't > labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace > expected and the likely root XML element name(s). How about: Magic number(s): All CCXML documents will contain a element that belongs to the "http://www.w3.org/2002/09/ccxml" namespace. >> Person & email address to contact for further information: >> >> RJ Auburn, . > > Should there be a W3C contact as well? Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? >> Intended usage: >> >> COMMON >> Author/Change controller: >> >> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web > Consortium's >> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these >> specifications. > > Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 From: rj at voxeo.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: Larry, Thanks for these comments. Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on these. I am going to try and address/comment on them can inline: On 07/21/2004 22:03, "Larry Masinter" wrote: > These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type > registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this > particular registration: Martin: Would you be the person to handle/address the general issues? > It might be helpful if the registration template explained > that "ccxml" stood for "Call Control eXtensible Markup Language" > for use in voice browser applications, and that the registration > is in a document intended to become a W3C recommendation. > > I'm not sure this is necessary, but since we're getting > W3C recommendations registering MIME types, I wondered > if making the registration template just a little bit > more explanatory would be useful. Good points. > Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks > before heading lines, which made your template hard > to read. If needed I can resubmit a nicer looking version. Let me know... > Specific comments: > >> this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should >> be considered. > > RFC 1738 has been superseded quite a while ago, by 2396. Thanks. I have updated the document. >> In addition, because of the extensibility features for CCXML, it is > possible >> that "application/ccxml+xml" may describe content that has security >> implications beyond those described here. However, if the processor > follows >> only the normative semantics of this specification, this content will be >> ignored. Only in the case where the processor recognizes and processes the >> additional content, or where further processing of that content is >> dispatched to other processors, would security issues potentially arise. > And >> in that case, they would fall outside the domain of this registration >> document. > > I don't think it's true that it falls outside the domain, > and the argument is just confusing. One major purpose of the > "security considerations" section is to help firewall > and security perimeter vendors decide what they need > to do when they see content marked with this type. > > If receivers are likely to interpret extensions and the > extensions are likely to cause security problems if interpreted, > you should say so. If the document explains, in allowing for > extensions, how to avoid security problems, then say so. Dave/Max: This has to do with the idea of people using name spaces or something like that to put in other markup that's not CCXML. I do not think this really needs to be here. Should I remove this? Or craft something completely new? >> Interoperability considerations: >> >> This specification describes processing semantics that dictate behavior > that >> must be followed when dealing with, among other things, unrecognized >> elements. >> >> Because CCXML is extensible, conferment > > conformant? Fixed... >> "application/ccxml+xml" processors >> can expect that content received is well-formed XML, but it cannot be >> guaranteed that the content is valid CCXML or that the processor will >> recognize all of the elements and attributes in the document. > > > I think the main purpose of "interoperability considerations" is > to talk about reasons why multiple implementations might not > interoperate. I don't know if you have any of those, but > I don't think what you say here (that someone might send > non-conformant content labeled with this MIME type) > really fits. Are all conforming CCXML implementations guaranteed > to be interoperable? If not, why not? There are a number of features that are considered optional in the specification. Do we need to put something about them here? >> Published specification: >> >> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >> described by this specification. > > I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect > if the template were to appear elsewhere to see > a bibliographic citation, e.g., > > "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C > Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, > > Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise > enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines > many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to > say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that > conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and > interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. Pointing at the schema/dtd sections seems reasonable. How is this for text: Published specification: This media type registration is for XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules this specification >> Additional information: >> Magic number(s): >> >> There is no single initial octet sequence that is always >> present in CCXML documents. > > While this section is titled "Magic number", I think > what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content > is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't > labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace > expected and the likely root XML element name(s). How about: Magic number(s): All CCXML documents will contain a element that belongs to the "http://www.w3.org/2002/09/ccxml" namespace. >> Person & email address to contact for further information: >> >> RJ Auburn, . > > Should there be a W3C contact as well? Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? >> Intended usage: >> >> COMMON >> Author/Change controller: >> >> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web > Consortium's >> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these >> specifications. > > Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. Dave/Max/Martin: Thoughts? --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 From: rj at voxeo.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <85713702.20040722200824@w3.org> Message-ID: On 07/22/2004 11:08, "Chris Lilley" wrote: > On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 7:03:48 AM, Larry wrote: > LM> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. > One more comment. > From the Status of this Document: >>> This document is for public review. Comments and discussion are >>> welcomed on the public mailing list < www-voice@w3.org >. To >>> subscribe, send an email to with the word >>> subscribe in the subject line (include the word unsubscribe if you >>> want to unsubscribe). The archive for the list is accessible on-line. > > Since the review includes the appendix, perhaps review comments on the > registration appendix should also be sent to the above review address > and handled like other Last call comments? Please do. I have gone ahead and added it to the CC list of this thread. RJ --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sm s-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2931@hrtades2.atea.be> Hello Ned, Thanks for the review remarks! See comments in-line. |-----Original Message----- |From: Ned Freed | | |A couple of points in addition to the ones Larry already made... | |> [NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on |the 14th of July |> from the IANA registration perl script] | |> Name : Olivier Biot | |> Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com | |> MIME media type name : Application | |> MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl | |> Required parameters : none | |> Optional parameters : |> none | |> Encoding considerations : binary |> This media type may require encoding on transports not |> capable of handling binary. | |> Security considerations : |> The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format |> may contain |> executable code and user confidential information. | |There's also the issue of data integrity. Would someone |tweaking this stuff |in transit be able to cause any problems? I assume the answer |is "yes" since executable code can be involved. This is correct. Changing bits of bytes within the data do compromise the message. I thought data integrity was beyond the scope of registering a MIME media type, but I'll now add a note. |There's also the issue of what, if anything, is done to prevent |tampering or leakage. Is there a preferred mechanism for adding |integrity/confidentiality services on top of this media type? Or does |the type itself include facilities for this? Normally the GSM SMS-TL traffic runs in a protected environment (carrier network), where confidentiality is a key element. Hence I did not really look at this aspect. Secure MIME, TLS, and signing are obvious means for providing (relatively) tamper-proof solutions. I will issue a new assignment proposal with the comments I received so far. Many thanks for taking the time to review! Best regards, Olivier From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jul 27 19:23:51 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2930@hrtades2.atea.be> Hello Larry, Thanks a lot for your review! I provided answers in-line. |-----Original Message----- |From: Larry Masinter | | |Since this is a vendor-tree media type, review is optional. |However, here are some review comments: | | |> Published specification : |> ETSI TS 123 040 available at |> (transposition of 3GPP TS 23.040 available at |> http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/) | |I had trouble finding the document using this reference. |I put "ETSI TS 123 040" into the form at |http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp |and got another query form. | |and http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/ leads |you down to |http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ |which then has 20-30 zip files, but not much clue |as to which one would contain the definition of the |MIME type. Aplologies for this. I used another 3GPP MIME media type registration as an example, tested the hyperlinks and could find the documents. It is true that for people not familiar with those specs this is somehow cumbersome. Anyway, the 3GPP specs consist of several "stages", so the entire directory in http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ is relevant. You should have sufficient information if you read 23040-600.zip: it contains 3GPP TS 23.040 V6.0.0 (2002-09) Technical Specification 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Terminals; Technical realization of the Short Message Service (SMS); (Release 6) |Do you mean 'translation' instead of 'transposition'? |I'm not sure what it means to have a 'transposition' of |a document. I have taken that text from the same registration example. Both the 3GPP and ETSI document are somehow linked. The ETSI document is based on the 3GPP document. I suppose the verb "transpose" in English does not correspond fully with the verb "transposer" in French which I suppose was intended. In this situation "transpose" means "rewrite in terms of ETSI", as far as I understand. |> Applications which use this media : |> Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects |> (messaging, download etc.). |> |> |> Additional information : |> |> 1. Magic number(s) : n/a |> 2. File extension(s) : .sms-tl |> 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a |> 4. Object Identifiers: n/a NOTE: this media type is not intended for file storage. It has to be seen as something like a SOAP message. Maybe the file extension should also be "n/a" hence. |> Person to contact for further information : |> |> 1. Name : Olivier Biot |> 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com |> |> Intended usage : Common |> The Short Messaging Service is a very common messaging |> service available on most mobile networks. |> The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS |> message to be |> delivered independent of the transport network. | |Currently, SMS <-> EMail gateways work by translating |to/from text/plain. This works pretty well. Is the |intention to gateway into this MIME type? It would |seem that interoperability might suffer. It is more than the well-known textual SMS body. There are many applications of non-text SMS messages, such as EMS extensions and WAP Push. In order to be interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a Content-Type header identifies the data type. |> Author/Change controller : Olivier Biot | |If this is really 'vnd.3gpp' and not 'vnd.oliver-biot', |wouldn't the 'change controller' be the 3GPP committee? I again used existing 3GPP registrations as an example, and I did not see "The 3GPP" as applicant. However, as the media type really represents something from 3GPP, it wouldn't make sense *not* putting it in the 3GPP vendor tree. I also consulted some of our 3GPP/IETF representatives and they told me the most important was to comply with the MIME registration procedure as published in the MIME IETF standards (which hopefully I did). (I think I should have to use the "prs." vanity tree if I wanted to register it as/for myself.) Many thanks for taking the time to review! Best regards, Olivier >From Olivier.Biot@siemens.com Tue Jul 27 19:32:56 2004 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jul 27 19:33:00 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sm s-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2931@hrtades2.atea.be> Hello Ned, Thanks for the review remarks! See comments in-line. |-----Original Message----- |From: Ned Freed | | |A couple of points in addition to the ones Larry already made... | |> [NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on |the 14th of July |> from the IANA registration perl script] | |> Name : Olivier Biot | |> Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com | |> MIME media type name : Application | |> MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl | |> Required parameters : none | |> Optional parameters : |> none | |> Encoding considerations : binary |> This media type may require encoding on transports not |> capable of handling binary. | |> Security considerations : |> The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format |> may contain |> executable code and user confidential information. | |There's also the issue of data integrity. Would someone |tweaking this stuff |in transit be able to cause any problems? I assume the answer |is "yes" since executable code can be involved. This is correct. Changing bits of bytes within the data do compromise the message. I thought data integrity was beyond the scope of registering a MIME media type, but I'll now add a note. |There's also the issue of what, if anything, is done to prevent |tampering or leakage. Is there a preferred mechanism for adding |integrity/confidentiality services on top of this media type? Or does |the type itself include facilities for this? Normally the GSM SMS-TL traffic runs in a protected environment (carrier network), where confidentiality is a key element. Hence I did not really look at this aspect. Secure MIME, TLS, and signing are obvious means for providing (relatively) tamper-proof solutions. I will issue a new assignment proposal with the comments I received so far. Many thanks for taking the time to review! Best regards, Olivier >From rj@voxeo.com Tue Jul 27 21:18:37 2004 From: rj at voxeo.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Tue Jul 27 21:19:14 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <85713702.20040722200824@w3.org> Message-ID: On 07/22/2004 11:08, "Chris Lilley" wrote: > On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 7:03:48 AM, Larry wrote: > LM> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. > One more comment. > From the Status of this Document: >>> This document is for public review. Comments and discussion are >>> welcomed on the public mailing list < www-voice@w3.org >. To >>> subscribe, send an email to with the word >>> subscribe in the subject line (include the word unsubscribe if you >>> want to unsubscribe). The archive for the list is accessible on-line. > > Since the review includes the appendix, perhaps review comments on the > registration appendix should also be sent to the above review address > and handled like other Last call comments? Please do. I have gone ahead and added it to the CC list of this thread. RJ --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gp p.sms-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2930@hrtades2.atea.be> Hello Larry, Thanks a lot for your review! I provided answers in-line. |-----Original Message----- |From: Larry Masinter | | |Since this is a vendor-tree media type, review is optional. |However, here are some review comments: | | |> Published specification : |> ETSI TS 123 040 available at |> (transposition of 3GPP TS 23.040 available at |> http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/) | |I had trouble finding the document using this reference. |I put "ETSI TS 123 040" into the form at |http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp |and got another query form. | |and http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/ leads |you down to |http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ |which then has 20-30 zip files, but not much clue |as to which one would contain the definition of the |MIME type. Aplologies for this. I used another 3GPP MIME media type registration as an example, tested the hyperlinks and could find the documents. It is true that for people not familiar with those specs this is somehow cumbersome. Anyway, the 3GPP specs consist of several "stages", so the entire directory in http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ is relevant. You should have sufficient information if you read 23040-600.zip: it contains 3GPP TS 23.040 V6.0.0 (2002-09) Technical Specification 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical Specification Group Terminals; Technical realization of the Short Message Service (SMS); (Release 6) |Do you mean 'translation' instead of 'transposition'? |I'm not sure what it means to have a 'transposition' of |a document. I have taken that text from the same registration example. Both the 3GPP and ETSI document are somehow linked. The ETSI document is based on the 3GPP document. I suppose the verb "transpose" in English does not correspond fully with the verb "transposer" in French which I suppose was intended. In this situation "transpose" means "rewrite in terms of ETSI", as far as I understand. |> Applications which use this media : |> Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects |> (messaging, download etc.). |> |> |> Additional information : |> |> 1. Magic number(s) : n/a |> 2. File extension(s) : .sms-tl |> 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a |> 4. Object Identifiers: n/a NOTE: this media type is not intended for file storage. It has to be seen as something like a SOAP message. Maybe the file extension should also be "n/a" hence. |> Person to contact for further information : |> |> 1. Name : Olivier Biot |> 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com |> |> Intended usage : Common |> The Short Messaging Service is a very common messaging |> service available on most mobile networks. |> The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS |> message to be |> delivered independent of the transport network. | |Currently, SMS <-> EMail gateways work by translating |to/from text/plain. This works pretty well. Is the |intention to gateway into this MIME type? It would |seem that interoperability might suffer. It is more than the well-known textual SMS body. There are many applications of non-text SMS messages, such as EMS extensions and WAP Push. In order to be interoperable for these, it makes sense to use the 3GPP SMS-TL as an envelope which you can type and send over a MIME friendly transport where a Content-Type header identifies the data type. |> Author/Change controller : Olivier Biot | |If this is really 'vnd.3gpp' and not 'vnd.oliver-biot', |wouldn't the 'change controller' be the 3GPP committee? I again used existing 3GPP registrations as an example, and I did not see "The 3GPP" as applicant. However, as the media type really represents something from 3GPP, it wouldn't make sense *not* putting it in the 3GPP vendor tree. I also consulted some of our 3GPP/IETF representatives and they told me the most important was to comply with the MIME registration procedure as published in the MIME IETF standards (which hopefully I did). (I think I should have to use the "prs." vanity tree if I wanted to register it as/for myself.) Many thanks for taking the time to review! Best regards, Olivier From: ned.freed at mrochek.com (ned.freed@mrochek.com) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sm s-tl In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:27:45 +0200" <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> References: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <01LCY9N1IK0U00005R@mauve.mrochek.com> A couple of points in addition to the ones Larry already made... > [NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on the 14th of July > from the IANA registration perl script] > Name : Olivier Biot > Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > MIME media type name : Application > MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl > Required parameters : none > Optional parameters : > none > Encoding considerations : binary > This media type may require encoding on transports not capable of handling > binary. > Security considerations : > The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain > executable code and user confidential information. There's also the issue of data integrity. Would someone tweaking this stuff in transit be able to cause any problems? I assume the answer is "yes" since executable code can be involved. There's also the issue of what, if anything, is done to prevent tampering or leakage. Is there a preferred mechanism for adding integrity/confidentiality services on top of this media type? Or does the type itself include facilities for this? Ned From: ned.freed at mrochek.com (ned.freed@mrochek.com) Date: Tue Jul 27 18:30:54 2004 Subject: MIME media type registration does not appear? In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Tue, 27 Jul 2004 12:09:58 +0200" <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2923@hrtades2.atea.be> References: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2923@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <01LCY9751K4M00005R@mauve.mrochek.com> > Hi list, > It looks like the MIME media type registration form at IANA does not work, > as I can't find any trace of a registration I posted on the 14th of July > (not even with Google). > I guess this is the mailing list for discussing new MIME media type > registrations. If not, please let me know. > Should I post the message generated by the registration script to this list? What you should do is contact IANA (iana@iana.org) and report the problem you are having. Ned >From ned.freed@mrochek.com Tue Jul 27 18:39:01 2004 From: ned.freed at mrochek.com (ned.freed@mrochek.com) Date: Tue Jul 27 18:43:41 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sm s-tl In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:27:45 +0200" <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> References: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <01LCY9N1IK0U00005R@mauve.mrochek.com> A couple of points in addition to the ones Larry already made... > [NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on the 14th of July > from the IANA registration perl script] > Name : Olivier Biot > Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > MIME media type name : Application > MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl > Required parameters : none > Optional parameters : > none > Encoding considerations : binary > This media type may require encoding on transports not capable of handling > binary. > Security considerations : > The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain > executable code and user confidential information. There's also the issue of data integrity. Would someone tweaking this stuff in transit be able to cause any problems? I assume the answer is "yes" since executable code can be involved. There's also the issue of what, if anything, is done to prevent tampering or leakage. Is there a preferred mechanism for adding integrity/confidentiality services on top of this media type? Or does the type itself include facilities for this? Ned From: ned.freed at mrochek.com (ned.freed@mrochek.com) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:45 2006 Subject: MIME media type registration does not appear? In-Reply-To: "Your message dated Tue, 27 Jul 2004 12:09:58 +0200" <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2923@hrtades2.atea.be> References: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2923@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <01LCY9751K4M00005R@mauve.mrochek.com> > Hi list, > It looks like the MIME media type registration form at IANA does not work, > as I can't find any trace of a registration I posted on the 14th of July > (not even with Google). > I guess this is the mailing list for discussing new MIME media type > registrations. If not, please let me know. > Should I post the message generated by the registration script to this list? What you should do is contact IANA (iana@iana.org) and report the problem you are having. Ned From: LMM at acm.org (Larry Masinter) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl In-Reply-To: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <0I1I00I4AR2TE7@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Since this is a vendor-tree media type, review is optional. However, here are some review comments: > Published specification : > ETSI TS 123 040 available at > (transposition of 3GPP TS 23.040 available at > http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/) I had trouble finding the document using this reference. I put "ETSI TS 123 040" into the form at http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp and got another query form. and http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/ leads you down to http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ which then has 20-30 zip files, but not much clue as to which one would contain the definition of the MIME type. Do you mean 'translation' instead of 'transposition'? I'm not sure what it means to have a 'transposition' of a document. > Applications which use this media : > Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects > (messaging, download etc.). > > > Additional information : > > 1. Magic number(s) : n/a > 2. File extension(s) : .sms-tl > 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a > 4. Object Identifiers: n/a > > > > Person to contact for further information : > > 1. Name : Olivier Biot > 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > > Intended usage : Common > The Short Messaging Service is a very common messaging service available on > most mobile networks. > The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be > delivered independent of the transport network. Currently, SMS <-> EMail gateways work by translating to/from text/plain. This works pretty well. Is the intention to gateway into this MIME type? It would seem that interoperability might suffer. > Author/Change controller : Olivier Biot If this is really 'vnd.3gpp' and not 'vnd.oliver-biot', wouldn't the 'change controller' be the 3GPP committee? Regards, Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sm s-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> [NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on the 14th of July from the IANA registration perl script] Name : Olivier Biot Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com MIME media type name : Application MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Required parameters : none Optional parameters : none Encoding considerations : binary This media type may require encoding on transports not capable of handling binary. Security considerations : The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain executable code and user confidential information. Interoperability considerations : The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. Published specification : ETSI TS 123 040 available at http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (transposition of 3GPP TS 23.040 available at http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/) Applications which use this media : Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, download etc.). Additional information : 1. Magic number(s) : n/a 2. File extension(s) : .sms-tl 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a 4. Object Identifiers: n/a Person to contact for further information : 1. Name : Olivier Biot 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com Intended usage : Common The Short Messaging Service is a very common messaging service available on most mobile networks. The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be delivered independent of the transport network. Author/Change controller : Olivier Biot From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jul 27 12:10:12 2004 Subject: MIME media type registration does not appear? Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2923@hrtades2.atea.be> Hi list, It looks like the MIME media type registration form at IANA does not work, as I can't find any trace of a registration I posted on the 14th of July (not even with Google). I guess this is the mailing list for discussing new MIME media type registrations. If not, please let me know. Should I post the message generated by the registration script to this list? Best regards, Olivier Biot >From Olivier.Biot@siemens.com Tue Jul 27 14:27:45 2004 From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jul 27 14:27:56 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sm s-tl Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> [NOTE: this is the registration email as returned to me on the 14th of July from the IANA registration perl script] Name : Olivier Biot Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com MIME media type name : Application MIME subtype name : Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl Required parameters : none Optional parameters : none Encoding considerations : binary This media type may require encoding on transports not capable of handling binary. Security considerations : The Short Messaging Service Transfer Layer (SMS-TL) format may contain executable code and user confidential information. Interoperability considerations : The SMS-TL MIME type allows transport interoperability between the Short Messaging Service (SMS) and other messaging systems supporting SMS-TL, and some transport layer independence for transporting an SMS message. Published specification : ETSI TS 123 040 available at http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp (transposition of 3GPP TS 23.040 available at http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/) Applications which use this media : Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects (messaging, download etc.). Additional information : 1. Magic number(s) : n/a 2. File extension(s) : .sms-tl 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a 4. Object Identifiers: n/a Person to contact for further information : 1. Name : Olivier Biot 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com Intended usage : Common The Short Messaging Service is a very common messaging service available on most mobile networks. The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be delivered independent of the transport network. Author/Change controller : Olivier Biot >From LMM@acm.org Tue Jul 27 18:28:05 2004 From: LMM at acm.org (Larry Masinter) Date: Tue Jul 27 18:28:39 2004 Subject: Request for MIME media type Application/Vendor Tree - vnd.3gpp.sms-tl In-Reply-To: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2928@hrtades2.atea.be> Message-ID: <0I1I00I4AR2TE7@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Since this is a vendor-tree media type, review is optional. However, here are some review comments: > Published specification : > ETSI TS 123 040 available at > (transposition of 3GPP TS 23.040 available at > http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/) I had trouble finding the document using this reference. I put "ETSI TS 123 040" into the form at http://pda.etsi.org/pda/queryform.asp and got another query form. and http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/ leads you down to http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/Specs/archive/23_series/23.040/ which then has 20-30 zip files, but not much clue as to which one would contain the definition of the MIME type. Do you mean 'translation' instead of 'transposition'? I'm not sure what it means to have a 'transposition' of a document. > Applications which use this media : > Applications that transport and manipulate MIME typed objects > (messaging, download etc.). > > > Additional information : > > 1. Magic number(s) : n/a > 2. File extension(s) : .sms-tl > 3. Macintosh file type code : n/a > 4. Object Identifiers: n/a > > > > Person to contact for further information : > > 1. Name : Olivier Biot > 2. Email : olivier.biot@siemens.com > > Intended usage : Common > The Short Messaging Service is a very common messaging service available on > most mobile networks. > The registration of the associated MIME type allows a SMS message to be > delivered independent of the transport network. Currently, SMS <-> EMail gateways work by translating to/from text/plain. This works pretty well. Is the intention to gateway into this MIME type? It would seem that interoperability might suffer. > Author/Change controller : Olivier Biot If this is really 'vnd.3gpp' and not 'vnd.oliver-biot', wouldn't the 'change controller' be the 3GPP committee? Regards, Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net From: Olivier.Biot at siemens.com (Biot Olivier) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: MIME media type registration does not appear? Message-ID: <6B546A602AD2D211BFF00008C7A428890B1E2923@hrtades2.atea.be> Hi list, It looks like the MIME media type registration form at IANA does not work, as I can't find any trace of a registration I posted on the 14th of July (not even with Google). I guess this is the mailing list for discussing new MIME media type registrations. If not, please let me know. Should I post the message generated by the registration script to this list? Best regards, Olivier Biot From: chris at w3.org (Chris Lilley) Date: Thu Jul 22 20:08:30 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <85713702.20040722200824@w3.org> On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 7:03:48 AM, Larry wrote: LM> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. One more comment. From: chris at w3.org (Chris Lilley) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <85713702.20040722200824@w3.org> On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 7:03:48 AM, Larry wrote: LM> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. One more comment. From: chris at w3.org (Chris Lilley) Date: Thu Jul 22 20:05:40 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <3310006012.20040722200532@w3.org> On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 7:03:48 AM, Larry wrote: LM> These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type LM> registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this LM> particular registration: LM> ------------- LM> It might be helpful if the registration template explained LM> that "ccxml" stood for "Call Control eXtensible Markup Language" LM> for use in voice browser applications, and that the registration LM> is in a document intended to become a W3C recommendation. I agree that this sort of context, although obvious when the W3C document as a whole is studies, is fairly opaque when a single appendix is extracted and sent as an email message. Prepending the 'Abstract' of the specification, and giving a link to the full specification, would be helpful. LM> I'm not sure this is necessary, but since we're getting LM> W3C recommendations registering MIME types, I wondered LM> if making the registration template just a little bit LM> more explanatory would be useful. Certainly. LM> Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks LM> before heading lines, which made your template hard LM> to read. LM> Specific comments: >> this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should >> be considered. LM> RFC 1738 has been superseded quite a while ago, by 2396. When citing an RFC abcd, it is useful to do a Google search for "Obsoletes: abcd" and "Updates: abcd" because RFCs do not have 'latest version' URIs (or indeed canonical URIs at all). >> Published specification: >> >> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >> described by this specification. 'This specification' should be a link to the main page of the document, even if that is a link to itself for a short document, and inline URIs should be indicated in the ascii text version by a numbered link [1] [1] http://example.org/like/this A conversion to text can be obtained for any W3C document by appending ,text to the URI (before any fragment) for example http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/,text#ccxml-mime-definition which is redirected to (watch out for line wrapping): http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/html2txt?url=http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/#ccxml-mime-definition LM> I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect LM> if the template were to appear elsewhere to see LM> a bibliographic citation, e.g., LM> "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C LM> Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, I agree. LM> Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise LM> enough? Not when the appendix is transmitted separately, no. LM> In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines LM> many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to LM> say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that LM> conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and LM> interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. >> Additional information: >> Magic number(s): >> >> There is no single initial octet sequence that is always >> present in CCXML documents. LM> While this section is titled "Magic number", I think LM> what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content LM> is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't LM> labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace LM> expected and the likely root XML element name(s). Yes, I agrre that this is current good practice. The text in this registration is fine, but it should add something like: This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect ccXML by its namespace URI, http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml Hmm the revision to RFC 3023 should probably supply suggested boilerplate for this and, indeed, perhaps a registration template with the common items for all +xml types. >> Person & email address to contact for further information: >> >> RJ Auburn, . LM> Should there be a W3C contact as well? The person listed is the W3C Editor of the specification. The fact that they are the document editor should be noted since its not apparent from the appendix in isolation. >> Intended usage: >> >> COMMON >> Author/Change controller: >> >> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web LM> Consortium's >> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these >> specifications. LM> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. LM> Larry -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group From: chris at w3.org (Chris Lilley) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> References: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> Message-ID: <3310006012.20040722200532@w3.org> On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 7:03:48 AM, Larry wrote: LM> These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type LM> registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this LM> particular registration: LM> ------------- LM> It might be helpful if the registration template explained LM> that "ccxml" stood for "Call Control eXtensible Markup Language" LM> for use in voice browser applications, and that the registration LM> is in a document intended to become a W3C recommendation. I agree that this sort of context, although obvious when the W3C document as a whole is studies, is fairly opaque when a single appendix is extracted and sent as an email message. Prepending the 'Abstract' of the specification, and giving a link to the full specification, would be helpful. LM> I'm not sure this is necessary, but since we're getting LM> W3C recommendations registering MIME types, I wondered LM> if making the registration template just a little bit LM> more explanatory would be useful. Certainly. LM> Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks LM> before heading lines, which made your template hard LM> to read. LM> Specific comments: >> this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should >> be considered. LM> RFC 1738 has been superseded quite a while ago, by 2396. When citing an RFC abcd, it is useful to do a Google search for "Obsoletes: abcd" and "Updates: abcd" because RFCs do not have 'latest version' URIs (or indeed canonical URIs at all). >> Published specification: >> >> This media type registration is for CCXML documents as >> described by this specification. 'This specification' should be a link to the main page of the document, even if that is a link to itself for a short document, and inline URIs should be indicated in the ascii text version by a numbered link [1] [1] http://example.org/like/this A conversion to text can be obtained for any W3C document by appending ,text to the URI (before any fragment) for example http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/,text#ccxml-mime-definition which is redirected to (watch out for line wrapping): http://cgi.w3.org/cgi-bin/html2txt?url=http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/#ccxml-mime-definition LM> I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect LM> if the template were to appear elsewhere to see LM> a bibliographic citation, e.g., LM> "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C LM> Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, I agree. LM> Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise LM> enough? Not when the appendix is transmitted separately, no. LM> In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines LM> many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to LM> say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that LM> conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and LM> interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. >> Additional information: >> Magic number(s): >> >> There is no single initial octet sequence that is always >> present in CCXML documents. LM> While this section is titled "Magic number", I think LM> what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content LM> is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't LM> labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace LM> expected and the likely root XML element name(s). Yes, I agrre that this is current good practice. The text in this registration is fine, but it should add something like: This media type is expected to be handled by an XML processor, as indicated by "+xml". XML processors may detect ccXML by its namespace URI, http://www.w3.org/2001/vxml Hmm the revision to RFC 3023 should probably supply suggested boilerplate for this and, indeed, perhaps a registration template with the common items for all +xml types. >> Person & email address to contact for further information: >> >> RJ Auburn, . LM> Should there be a W3C contact as well? The person listed is the W3C Editor of the specification. The fact that they are the document editor should be noted since its not apparent from the appendix in isolation. >> Intended usage: >> >> COMMON >> Author/Change controller: >> >> The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web LM> Consortium's >> Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these >> specifications. LM> Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. LM> Larry -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Chair, W3C SVG Working Group Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group From: LMM at acm.org (Larry Masinter) Date: Thu Jul 22 07:05:37 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this particular registration: ------------- It might be helpful if the registration template explained that "ccxml" stood for "Call Control eXtensible Markup Language" for use in voice browser applications, and that the registration is in a document intended to become a W3C recommendation. I'm not sure this is necessary, but since we're getting W3C recommendations registering MIME types, I wondered if making the registration template just a little bit more explanatory would be useful. Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks before heading lines, which made your template hard to read. Specific comments: > this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should > be considered. RFC 1738 has been superseded quite a while ago, by 2396. > In addition, because of the extensibility features for CCXML, it is possible > that "application/ccxml+xml" may describe content that has security > implications beyond those described here. However, if the processor follows > only the normative semantics of this specification, this content will be > ignored. Only in the case where the processor recognizes and processes the > additional content, or where further processing of that content is > dispatched to other processors, would security issues potentially arise. And > in that case, they would fall outside the domain of this registration > document. I don't think it's true that it falls outside the domain, and the argument is just confusing. One major purpose of the "security considerations" section is to help firewall and security perimeter vendors decide what they need to do when they see content marked with this type. If receivers are likely to interpret extensions and the extensions are likely to cause security problems if interpreted, you should say so. If the document explains, in allowing for extensions, how to avoid security problems, then say so. > Interoperability considerations: > > This specification describes processing semantics that dictate behavior that > must be followed when dealing with, among other things, unrecognized > elements. > > Because CCXML is extensible, conferment conformant? > "application/ccxml+xml" processors > can expect that content received is well-formed XML, but it cannot be > guaranteed that the content is valid CCXML or that the processor will > recognize all of the elements and attributes in the document. I think the main purpose of "interoperability considerations" is to talk about reasons why multiple implementations might not interoperate. I don't know if you have any of those, but I don't think what you say here (that someone might send non-conformant content labeled with this MIME type) really fits. Are all conforming CCXML implementations guaranteed to be interoperable? If not, why not? > Published specification: > > This media type registration is for CCXML documents as > described by this specification. I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect if the template were to appear elsewhere to see a bibliographic citation, e.g., "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. > Additional information: > Magic number(s): > > There is no single initial octet sequence that is always > present in CCXML documents. While this section is titled "Magic number", I think what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace expected and the likely root XML element name(s). > Person & email address to contact for further information: > > RJ Auburn, . Should there be a W3C contact as well? > Intended usage: > > COMMON > Author/Change controller: > > The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web Consortium's > Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these > specifications. Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net From: LMM at acm.org (Larry Masinter) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <0I1800NXFM2I0M@mailsj-v1.corp.adobe.com> These comments are as much about the general "IETF MIME type registration from W3C recommendation" as they are about this particular registration: ------------- It might be helpful if the registration template explained that "ccxml" stood for "Call Control eXtensible Markup Language" for use in voice browser applications, and that the registration is in a document intended to become a W3C recommendation. I'm not sure this is necessary, but since we're getting W3C recommendations registering MIME types, I wondered if making the registration template just a little bit more explanatory would be useful. Your translation from HTML to ASCII left out line breaks before heading lines, which made your template hard to read. Specific comments: > this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should > be considered. RFC 1738 has been superseded quite a while ago, by 2396. > In addition, because of the extensibility features for CCXML, it is possible > that "application/ccxml+xml" may describe content that has security > implications beyond those described here. However, if the processor follows > only the normative semantics of this specification, this content will be > ignored. Only in the case where the processor recognizes and processes the > additional content, or where further processing of that content is > dispatched to other processors, would security issues potentially arise. And > in that case, they would fall outside the domain of this registration > document. I don't think it's true that it falls outside the domain, and the argument is just confusing. One major purpose of the "security considerations" section is to help firewall and security perimeter vendors decide what they need to do when they see content marked with this type. If receivers are likely to interpret extensions and the extensions are likely to cause security problems if interpreted, you should say so. If the document explains, in allowing for extensions, how to avoid security problems, then say so. > Interoperability considerations: > > This specification describes processing semantics that dictate behavior that > must be followed when dealing with, among other things, unrecognized > elements. > > Because CCXML is extensible, conferment conformant? > "application/ccxml+xml" processors > can expect that content received is well-formed XML, but it cannot be > guaranteed that the content is valid CCXML or that the processor will > recognize all of the elements and attributes in the document. I think the main purpose of "interoperability considerations" is to talk about reasons why multiple implementations might not interoperate. I don't know if you have any of those, but I don't think what you say here (that someone might send non-conformant content labeled with this MIME type) really fits. Are all conforming CCXML implementations guaranteed to be interoperable? If not, why not? > Published specification: > > This media type registration is for CCXML documents as > described by this specification. I'm not 100% sure if this is necessary, but I'd expect if the template were to appear elsewhere to see a bibliographic citation, e.g., "Voice Browser Call Control: CCXML Version 1.0", W3C Working Draft, 30 April 2004, W3C, Is "this specification" (or the whole specification) precise enough? In some other cases, a single W3C recommendation defines many different data types. Perhaps it would be useful to say, somewhere, e.g., that the MIME type refers to XML bodies that conform to the DTD/Schema referenced in Appendix B and C and interpreted by the rules in the cited specification. > Additional information: > Magic number(s): > > There is no single initial octet sequence that is always > present in CCXML documents. While this section is titled "Magic number", I think what we're seeing in MIME registrations for XML content is a description of how to recognize CCXML if it isn't labeled. It would be useful here to identify the namespace expected and the likely root XML element name(s). > Person & email address to contact for further information: > > RJ Auburn, . Should there be a W3C contact as well? > Intended usage: > > COMMON > Author/Change controller: > > The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web Consortium's > Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these > specifications. Or perhaps the W3C contact address should be listed here. Larry -- http://larry.masinter.net From: ylafon at w3.org (Yves Lafon) Date: Wed Jul 21 15:46:51 2004 Subject: Submission of the application/soap_xop+xml Media Mype Message-ID: All, The media type is defined in the W3C Last Call Working Draft of "SOAP Message Transmission Optimization Mechanism" [1] Below is a full text version for convenience. [2] Please direct comments to xmlp-comments@w3.org. Best regards, [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-mtom/#media_type [2] A The application/soap_xop+xml Media Type A.1 Introduction SOAP version 1.2 ([SOAP Part 1] and [SOAP Part 2]) is a lightweight protocol intended for exchange of structured information between peers in a decentralized, distributed environment. It defines an extensible messaging framework that contains a message construct based on XML technologies that can be exchanged over a variety of underlying protocols. The XML-binary Optimized Packaging Mechanism [XOP] is an alternate serialization of the XML Infoset, intended to make processing and representation of certain types of content (specifically, that which is base64-encoded) more efficient. Such serializations, when free-standing, are called XOP Packages; the portion of the XOP Package that represents the structure and non-optimized content of the Infoset are called XOP Documents, and are serialized as XML. This appendix defines the media type application/soap_xop+xml which can be used to identify SOAP 1.2 message envelopes that have been serialized as XOP Documents using XML 1.0 ([XML 1.0]). The application/soap_xop+xml media type explicitly identifies the XOP Document portion of a SOAP 1.2 message envelope, serialized as XML 1.0. In other words, it identifies the serialized XML after the extraction of any content into the XOP Package; it does not identify the package itself. XOP Documents not serialized as XML 1.0 or representing message envelopes with a different SOAP namespace version MUST NOT use it. A.2 Registration * MIME media type name: application. * MIME subtype name: soap_xop+xml * Required parameters: none * Optional parameters: o "charset": This parameter has identical semantics to the charset parameter of the application/xml media type as specified in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023]. o "action": This optional parameter can be used to specify the URI that identifies the intent of the message. In SOAP 1.2, it serves a similar purpose as the SOAPAction HTTP header field did in SOAP 1.1. Namely, its value identifies the intent of the message. The value of the action parameter is an absolute URI-reference as defined by RFC 2396 [RFC 2396]. SOAP places no restrictions on the specificity of the URI or that it is resolvable. Although the purpose of the action parameter is to indicate the intent of the SOAP message there is no mechanism for automatically computing the value based on the SOAP envelope. In other words, the value has to be determined out of band. It is recommended that the same value be used to identify sets of message types that are logically connected in some manner, for example part of the same "service". It is strongly RECOMMENDED that the URI be globally unique and stable over time. The presence and content of the action parameter MAY be used by servers such as firewalls to appropriately filter SOAP messages and it may be used by servers to facilitate dispatching of SOAP messages to internal message handlers etc. It SHOULD NOT be used as an insecure form of access authorization. Use of the action parameter is OPTIONAL. SOAP Receivers MAY use it as a hint to optimize processing, but SHOULD NOT require its presence in order to operate. * Encoding considerations: Identical to those of application/xml as described in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 3.2, as applied to the SOAP envelope Infoset. * Security considerations: Because SOAP can carry application defined data whose semantics is independent from that of any MIME wrapper (or context within which the MIME wrapper is used), one should not expect to be able to understand the semantics of the SOAP message based on the semantics of the MIME wrapper alone. Therefore, whenever using the application/soap_xop+xml media type, it is strongly RECOMMENDED that the security implications of the context within which the SOAP message is used is fully understood. The security implications are likely to involve both the specific SOAP binding to an underlying protocol as well as the application-defined semantics of the data carried in the SOAP message (though one must be careful when doing this, as discussed in SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], 7.3.1 Binding to Application-Specific Protocols. Also, see SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], 7. Security Considerations. In addition, as this media type uses the "+xml" convention, it shares the same security considerations as described in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 10. * Interoperability considerations: There are no known interoperability issues. * Published specification: SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], SOAP 1.2 Part 2, [SOAP Part 2], and XOP [XOP]. * Applications which use this media type: No known applications currently use this media type. * Additional information: o File extension: SOAP messages are not required or expected to be stored as files. o Fragment identifiers: Identical to that of application/xml as described in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 5. o Base URI: As specified in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 6. Also see SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], 6. Use of URIs in SOAP. o Macintosh File Type code: TEXT * Person and email address to contact for further information: Mark Nottingham * Intended usage: COMMON * Author/Change controller: The SOAP 1.2 specification set is a work product of the World Wide Web Consortium's XML Protocol Working Group. The W3C has change control over these specifications. -- Yves Lafon - W3C "Baroula que barouleras, au ti?u toujou t'entourneras." >From rj@rjauburn.com Wed Jul 21 16:26:35 2004 From: rj at rjauburn.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Wed Jul 21 16:27:13 2004 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml Message-ID: *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* This is a request for comments on the registration of the application/ccxml+xml mime type. The request is published as part of the CCXML 1.0 specification and is copied below. The url of the request is: http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/#ccxml-mime-definition Please send any comments on this request to rj@voxeo.com Thanks, RJ Appendix I - CCXML Media Type This appendix registers a new MIME media type, "application/ccxml+xml". I.1 Registration of MIME media type application/ccxml+xml MIME media type name: application MIME subtype name: ccxml+xml Required parameters: None. Optional parameters: charset This parameter has identical semantics to the charset parameter of the application/xml media type as specified in [RFC3023]. Encoding considerations: By virtue of CCXML content being XML, it has the same considerations when sent as "application/ccxml+xml" as does XML. See RFC 3023, section 3.2. Security considerations: Several CCXML instructions may cause arbitrary URIs to be referenced. In this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should be considered. In addition, because of the extensibility features for CCXML, it is possible that "application/ccxml+xml" may describe content that has security implications beyond those described here. However, if the processor follows only the normative semantics of this specification, this content will be ignored. Only in the case where the processor recognizes and processes the additional content, or where further processing of that content is dispatched to other processors, would security issues potentially arise. And in that case, they would fall outside the domain of this registration document. Interoperability considerations: This specification describes processing semantics that dictate behavior that must be followed when dealing with, among other things, unrecognized elements. Because CCXML is extensible, conferment "application/ccxml+xml" processors can expect that content received is well-formed XML, but it cannot be guaranteed that the content is valid CCXML or that the processor will recognize all of the elements and attributes in the document. Published specification: This media type registration is for CCXML documents as described by this specification. Additional information: Magic number(s): There is no single initial octet sequence that is always present in CCXML documents. File extension(s): CCXML documents are most often identified with the extensions ".ccxml". Macintosh File Type Code(s): TEXT Person & email address to contact for further information: RJ Auburn, . Intended usage: COMMON Author/Change controller: The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web Consortium's Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these specifications. From: ylafon at w3.org (Yves Lafon) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: Submission of the application/soap_xop+xml Media Mype Message-ID: All, The media type is defined in the W3C Last Call Working Draft of "SOAP Message Transmission Optimization Mechanism" [1] Below is a full text version for convenience. [2] Please direct comments to xmlp-comments@w3.org. Best regards, [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/soap12-mtom/#media_type [2] A The application/soap_xop+xml Media Type A.1 Introduction SOAP version 1.2 ([SOAP Part 1] and [SOAP Part 2]) is a lightweight protocol intended for exchange of structured information between peers in a decentralized, distributed environment. It defines an extensible messaging framework that contains a message construct based on XML technologies that can be exchanged over a variety of underlying protocols. The XML-binary Optimized Packaging Mechanism [XOP] is an alternate serialization of the XML Infoset, intended to make processing and representation of certain types of content (specifically, that which is base64-encoded) more efficient. Such serializations, when free-standing, are called XOP Packages; the portion of the XOP Package that represents the structure and non-optimized content of the Infoset are called XOP Documents, and are serialized as XML. This appendix defines the media type application/soap_xop+xml which can be used to identify SOAP 1.2 message envelopes that have been serialized as XOP Documents using XML 1.0 ([XML 1.0]). The application/soap_xop+xml media type explicitly identifies the XOP Document portion of a SOAP 1.2 message envelope, serialized as XML 1.0. In other words, it identifies the serialized XML after the extraction of any content into the XOP Package; it does not identify the package itself. XOP Documents not serialized as XML 1.0 or representing message envelopes with a different SOAP namespace version MUST NOT use it. A.2 Registration * MIME media type name: application. * MIME subtype name: soap_xop+xml * Required parameters: none * Optional parameters: o "charset": This parameter has identical semantics to the charset parameter of the application/xml media type as specified in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023]. o "action": This optional parameter can be used to specify the URI that identifies the intent of the message. In SOAP 1.2, it serves a similar purpose as the SOAPAction HTTP header field did in SOAP 1.1. Namely, its value identifies the intent of the message. The value of the action parameter is an absolute URI-reference as defined by RFC 2396 [RFC 2396]. SOAP places no restrictions on the specificity of the URI or that it is resolvable. Although the purpose of the action parameter is to indicate the intent of the SOAP message there is no mechanism for automatically computing the value based on the SOAP envelope. In other words, the value has to be determined out of band. It is recommended that the same value be used to identify sets of message types that are logically connected in some manner, for example part of the same "service". It is strongly RECOMMENDED that the URI be globally unique and stable over time. The presence and content of the action parameter MAY be used by servers such as firewalls to appropriately filter SOAP messages and it may be used by servers to facilitate dispatching of SOAP messages to internal message handlers etc. It SHOULD NOT be used as an insecure form of access authorization. Use of the action parameter is OPTIONAL. SOAP Receivers MAY use it as a hint to optimize processing, but SHOULD NOT require its presence in order to operate. * Encoding considerations: Identical to those of application/xml as described in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 3.2, as applied to the SOAP envelope Infoset. * Security considerations: Because SOAP can carry application defined data whose semantics is independent from that of any MIME wrapper (or context within which the MIME wrapper is used), one should not expect to be able to understand the semantics of the SOAP message based on the semantics of the MIME wrapper alone. Therefore, whenever using the application/soap_xop+xml media type, it is strongly RECOMMENDED that the security implications of the context within which the SOAP message is used is fully understood. The security implications are likely to involve both the specific SOAP binding to an underlying protocol as well as the application-defined semantics of the data carried in the SOAP message (though one must be careful when doing this, as discussed in SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], 7.3.1 Binding to Application-Specific Protocols. Also, see SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], 7. Security Considerations. In addition, as this media type uses the "+xml" convention, it shares the same security considerations as described in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 10. * Interoperability considerations: There are no known interoperability issues. * Published specification: SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], SOAP 1.2 Part 2, [SOAP Part 2], and XOP [XOP]. * Applications which use this media type: No known applications currently use this media type. * Additional information: o File extension: SOAP messages are not required or expected to be stored as files. o Fragment identifiers: Identical to that of application/xml as described in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 5. o Base URI: As specified in RFC 3023 [RFC 3023], section 6. Also see SOAP 1.2 Part 1 [SOAP Part 1], 6. Use of URIs in SOAP. o Macintosh File Type code: TEXT * Person and email address to contact for further information: Mark Nottingham * Intended usage: COMMON * Author/Change controller: The SOAP 1.2 specification set is a work product of the World Wide Web Consortium's XML Protocol Working Group. The W3C has change control over these specifications. -- Yves Lafon - W3C "Baroula que barouleras, au ti?u toujou t'entourneras." >From rj@rjauburn.com Wed Jul 21 16:26:35 2004 From: rj at rjauburn.com (RJ Auburn) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: Request for comments for Media Type registration of application/ccxml+xml Message-ID: *This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* This is a request for comments on the registration of the application/ccxml+xml mime type. The request is published as part of the CCXML 1.0 specification and is copied below. The url of the request is: http://www.w3.org/TR/ccxml/#ccxml-mime-definition Please send any comments on this request to rj@voxeo.com Thanks, RJ Appendix I - CCXML Media Type This appendix registers a new MIME media type, "application/ccxml+xml". I.1 Registration of MIME media type application/ccxml+xml MIME media type name: application MIME subtype name: ccxml+xml Required parameters: None. Optional parameters: charset This parameter has identical semantics to the charset parameter of the application/xml media type as specified in [RFC3023]. Encoding considerations: By virtue of CCXML content being XML, it has the same considerations when sent as "application/ccxml+xml" as does XML. See RFC 3023, section 3.2. Security considerations: Several CCXML instructions may cause arbitrary URIs to be referenced. In this case, the security issues of RFC1738, section 6, should be considered. In addition, because of the extensibility features for CCXML, it is possible that "application/ccxml+xml" may describe content that has security implications beyond those described here. However, if the processor follows only the normative semantics of this specification, this content will be ignored. Only in the case where the processor recognizes and processes the additional content, or where further processing of that content is dispatched to other processors, would security issues potentially arise. And in that case, they would fall outside the domain of this registration document. Interoperability considerations: This specification describes processing semantics that dictate behavior that must be followed when dealing with, among other things, unrecognized elements. Because CCXML is extensible, conferment "application/ccxml+xml" processors can expect that content received is well-formed XML, but it cannot be guaranteed that the content is valid CCXML or that the processor will recognize all of the elements and attributes in the document. Published specification: This media type registration is for CCXML documents as described by this specification. Additional information: Magic number(s): There is no single initial octet sequence that is always present in CCXML documents. File extension(s): CCXML documents are most often identified with the extensions ".ccxml". Macintosh File Type Code(s): TEXT Person & email address to contact for further information: RJ Auburn, . Intended usage: COMMON Author/Change controller: The CCXML specification is a work product of the World Wide Web Consortium's Voice Browser Working Group. The W3C has change control over these specifications. From: iana at iana.org (iana@iana.org) Date: Thu Jul 8 09:15:07 2004 Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[d3172205dcd5661b179167c0013cbdde]] Message-ID: <200407080715.i687F2M15277@santee.icann.org> Thank you for your message. The iana@iana.org address collects a tremendous amount of spam, and we have been forced to implement protective measures. In order to process your message we need to confirm that it came from a real email address. To confirm your message, you can either: 1) Reply to this message, without altering the subject line The "Re: " added by many mail clients is OK, but please note that this method is *not* foolproof. or 2) Visit the URL If you want to be very sure that your message gets through, do both steps above -- it does no harm to confirm more than once. For your reference, the subject of the message you sent was: "Hi ietf-types your best buying" and it arrived at IANA approximately at Thu Jul 8 00:15:02 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------- ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[d3172205dcd5661b179167c0013cbdde]] 1 From: iana at iana.org (iana@iana.org) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[d3172205dcd5661b179167c0013cbdde]] Message-ID: <200407080715.i687F2M15277@santee.icann.org> Thank you for your message. The iana@iana.org address collects a tremendous amount of spam, and we have been forced to implement protective measures. In order to process your message we need to confirm that it came from a real email address. To confirm your message, you can either: 1) Reply to this message, without altering the subject line The "Re: " added by many mail clients is OK, but please note that this method is *not* foolproof. or 2) Visit the URL If you want to be very sure that your message gets through, do both steps above -- it does no harm to confirm more than once. For your reference, the subject of the message you sent was: "Hi ietf-types your best buying" and it arrived at IANA approximately at Thu Jul 8 00:15:02 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------- ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[d3172205dcd5661b179167c0013cbdde]] 1 From: Misha.Wolf at reuters.com (Misha Wolf) Date: Wed Jul 7 19:08:46 2004 Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] Message-ID: <1987416CA83AC7499AC772F92E2DBF7801606008@LONSMSXM02.emea.ime.reuters.com> What does this mean: Tue Jul 6 21:55:18 2004 ? How about a time zone? And, possibly, a more standard layout? Thanks, Misha -----Original Message----- From: ietf-types-bounces@alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-types-bounces@alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of iana@iana.org Sent: 07 July 2004 05:55 To: ietf-types@iana.org Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] Thank you for your message. The iana@iana.org address collects a tremendous amount of spam, and we have been forced to implement protective measures. In order to process your message we need to confirm that it came from a real email address. To confirm your message, you can either: 1) reply to this message, without altering the subject line (the "Re: " added by many mail clients is OK). or 2) visit the URL For your reference, the subject of the message you sent was: "Ietf-types" and it arrived at IANA approximately at Tue Jul 6 21:55:18 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------- ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd. From: Misha.Wolf at reuters.com (Misha Wolf) Date: Tue Jan 3 16:22:44 2006 Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] Message-ID: <1987416CA83AC7499AC772F92E2DBF7801606008@LONSMSXM02.emea.ime.reuters.com> What does this mean: Tue Jul 6 21:55:18 2004 ? How about a time zone? And, possibly, a more standard layout? Thanks, Misha -----Original Message----- From: ietf-types-bounces@alvestrand.no [mailto:ietf-types-bounces@alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of iana@iana.org Sent: 07 July 2004 05:55 To: ietf-types@iana.org Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] Thank you for your message. The iana@iana.org address collects a tremendous amount of spam, and we have been forced to implement protective measures. In order to process your message we need to confirm that it came from a real email address. To confirm your message, you can either: 1) reply to this message, without altering the subject line (the "Re: " added by many mail clients is OK). or 2) visit the URL For your reference, the subject of the message you sent was: "Ietf-types" and it arrived at IANA approximately at Tue Jul 6 21:55:18 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------- ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] 1 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Visit our Internet site at http://www.reuters.com Get closer to the financial markets with Reuters Messaging - for more information and to register, visit http://www.reuters.com/messaging Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Reuters Ltd. From: iana at iana.org (iana@iana.org) Date: Wed Jul 7 18:52:09 2004 Subject: ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] Message-ID: <200407070455.i674tIX12213@santee.icann.org> Thank you for your message. The iana@iana.org address collects a tremendous amount of spam, and we have been forced to implement protective measures. In order to process your message we need to confirm that it came from a real email address. To confirm your message, you can either: 1) reply to this message, without altering the subject line (the "Re: " added by many mail clients is OK). or 2) visit the URL For your reference, the subject of the message you sent was: "Ietf-types" and it arrived at IANA approximately at Tue Jul 6 21:55:18 2004. --------------------------------------------------------------- ConfirmSystem: iana@icann.org [[045bf60d0988526850b2e84d8c229459]] 1