[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00

Internet Draft: IMAP Message Submission               R. Gellens, Editor
Document: draft-gellens-lemonade-push-00.txt                    Qualcomm
Expires: June 2004                                         December 2003


                        IMAP Message Submission

Status of this Memo

    This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
    all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
    Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
    other groups may also distribute working documents as
    Internet-Drafts.

    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
    months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
    at any time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts as
    reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

    The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
    <http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt>

    The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
    <http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html>.


Copyright Notice

    Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  All Rights Reserved.


Abstract

    This document describes an IMAP protocol extension allowing clients
    to submit new messages using IMAP.  This is the so-called "IMAP
    Push" approach currently being considered by the lemonade working
    group as one solution to the "forward without download" problem
    (that is, as a means for clients to send new messages consisting of
    or containing all or parts of previously received messages without
    having to download and upload the data).  This proposal relies on
    additional IMAP extensions, including CATENATE and Annotations.  The
    IMAP extension described here requires that the message to be
    submitted be already composed and ready to go at the time of
    submission.





Gellens                    [Page 1]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


Table of Contents

     1.  Conventions Used in this Document  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
     2.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     3.  Concept of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
     4.  SUBMIT Extension  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       4.1  SUBMIT Command  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
       4.2  UID SUBMIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       4.3  SUBMIT Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     5.  Required SMTP/Submit Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.  Annotations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       6.1.  SMTP/Submit Extension Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       6.2.  Message Envelope and Status  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
         6.2.1.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
    10.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
    11.  Editor's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       Intellectual Property Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10


1.  Conventions Used in this Document

    The key words "REQUIRED", "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD
    NOT", and "MAY" in this document are to be interpreted as described
    in "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"
    [KEYWORDS].

    In protocol examples, "C:" designates lines sent by the client,
    while "S:" show lines sent by the server.  In such examples, line
    breaks are for editorial clarity only.

2.  Introduction

3.  Concept of Operation

    The client composes the message, presumably using the [CATENATE]
    extension (although potentially using only APPEND).  Annotations are
    used to specify the desired SMTP/Submit envelope, including
    MAIL-FROM, RCPT-TO, and any extensions.  This creates a draft
    message in an IMAP mailbox containing headers, body, and envelope.
    The message status is indicated in an annotation, which will
    generally be either 'pending' or 'queued' prior to submission.






Gellens                    [Page 2]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


    When desired, the client uses the SUBMIT or UID SUBMIT command as
    specified here.  This causes the message to be submitted to the
    message submission server for processing.  The status of the message
    is returned as a response, and is also indicated in the message
    annotation.

    The SUBMIT extension can require that the submit server used by the
    IMAP server support certain extensions.  Currently, only the [DSN]
    extension is required.  The client can learn which extensions are
    supported by the submit server by fetching a server annotation
    (using [ANNOTATEMORE]).  The IMAP server can either dynamically
    obtain the supported extensions when this annotation is accessed,
    or, if the IMAP and submit servers are integrated, can cache or
    obtain this information internally.

    If one or more recipients are rejected by the submit server, the
    IMAP server either aborts the message submission or continues.  By
    default it aborts, but the client can optionally instruct the server
    to continue.

    If one or more recipients failed, the client can use CATENATE to
    create a new draft which identical to the failed draft except for
    the corrected recipient information (both message header and RCPT-TO
    annotation) and can then resubmit the new message.  If the rejected
    recipient is not disclosed in the header, the client can instead
    correct the recipient in the RCPT-TO annotation in the original
    message and resubmit the corrected draft.

    NOTE: the requirement for and use of annotations could be avoided by
    having the SMTP/submit envelope be passed as a literal in the SUBMIT
    command, but this has a number of disadvantages.  It severs the
    linkage between the draft message and the envelope, requiring the
    client to maintain the envelope in local storage, and prevents the
    message from being prepared for submission by one client and
    submitted by another.  It also requires DSNs to learn the status of
    failed recipients if the client disconnects before receiving the
    response to the SUBMIT command.


4.  SUBMIT Extension

    The SUBMIT extension is advertised by "SUBMIT" in the CAPABILITY
    response.








Gellens                    [Page 3]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


4.1 SUBMIT Command

   Arguments:  message sequence number
               OPTIONAL "NOABORT"

   Responses:  untagged responses: SUBMIT

   Result:     OK - submit completed: if "NOABORT" was specified, then
                    all recipients were accepted by the submit server;
                    otherwise at least one recipient was accepted
               NO - submit error: submit server rejected some (unless
                    "NOABORT" specified) or all recipients; the submit
                    server rejected one or more extensions; the submit
                    server rejected the message for some other reason.
               BAD - command not supported or arguments invalid

    The SUBMIT command is only valid when a mailbox has been selected.
    The indicated message is submitted to the message submission server.
    Error responses by the submit server are returned in untagged SUBMIT
    responses (one per error).  If there are no errors, no SUBMIT
    responses are returned.  When the message has been accepted by the
    submit server, an OK response is sent.  If a recipient is rejected,
    by default the submission is aborted, although the remaining
    recipients will be checked (the IMAP server continues to send RCPT
    TO commands, but sends RSET or QUIT instead of DATA).  If the
    optional "NOABORT" option is specified, the submission is not
    aborted.  If an extension or other aspect of the message is
    rejected, the submission is aborted even if "NOABORT" was specified.

    If the connection to the client closes, or the client logs out,
    before the command response had been sent, the server continues
    processing the command.

    The client learns the status of the submitted message by the SUBMIT
    response and the command result.  The client can also learn the
    status by examining the annotation.  The annotation allows the
    client to find out what happened to a message submitted before a
    disconnect.

    Note that multiple SUBMIT commands can be pipelined together.

   Examples:
      C: a15 SUBMIT 12
      S: * SUBMIT "MAIL FROM:<hapless@example.com>" "550 5.7.0 user
           not authorized to submit (subscription expired)"
      S: a15 NO not my fault submission rejected by submit server

      C: a15 SUBMIT 12
      S: a15 OK submission accepted by submit server submit.example.com


Gellens                    [Page 4]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003



      C: a15 SUBMIT 12
      S: * SUBMIT "RCPT TO:<friend@example.org>" "550 5.1.1 <friend> User
           unknown"
      S: * SUBMIT "RCPT TO:<b1ff@example.org>" "550 5.1.1 <b1ff> User
           unknown"
      S: a15 NO not my fault submission rejected by submit server



4.2 UID SUBMIT

    This document adds SUBMIT as a valid command to UID.  The parameters
    are the same as for SUBMIT, but instead of a sequence number a
    unique identifier is used.


4.3 SUBMIT Response

   Contents:   envelope errors

    The SUBMIT response lists any error responses returned by the submit
    server to the SMTP/submit commands.  Each response contains the
    SMTP/submit command followed by the response code and text returned
    by the server.  Both the command and the response are strings.  Note
    that multi-line responses are returned as a single string containing
    the reply minus the CRLFs and repeated response codes, and with line
    breaks replaced by a single space.

   Example:
       S: * SUBMIT "MAIL FROM:<hapless@example.com>" "550 5.7.0 user
            not authorized to submit (subscription expired)"

       S: * SUBMIT "RCPT TO:<b1ff@example.org>" "550 5.1.1 <b1ff> User
            unknown"


5.  Required SMTP/Submit Extensions

    Currently, only [DSN] is the only SMTP/submit extension required to
    be supported.










Gellens                    [Page 5]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


6.  Annotations

6.1.  SMTP/Submit Extension Discovery

    The "/submit-capabilities" entry is used to access the capabilities
    supported by the submit server.  The IMAP server MUST ensure that
    the response is accurate when received by the client.  This can be
    done by opening a connection to the submit server to learn the
    capabilities when the "/submit-capabilities" entry is accessed, or
    by caching the information with a mechanism to update it when it
    changes (for example, if the two servers are combined or have other
    means of communication).

    Example:

    C: a GETANNOTATION "" "/submit-capabilities" "value"
    S: * ANNOTATION "/submit-capabilities" ("value.shared"
         "(PIPELINING) (8BITMIME) (ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES) (ETRN)
         (AUTH CRAM-MD5 NTLM PLAIN LOGIN) (AUTH=LOGIN)
         (SIZE 2147483647)")


6.2.  Message Envelope and Status

    This specification adds the following entry names:

    /draft-envelope
        Defines the top-level of annotations containing the SMTP/submit
        envelope for draft (sent or unsent) messages.

    /draft-envelope/$state
        The value of this annotation indicates the draft state:
        "pending", "queued", "sent", "rejected", or "partially-sent".

    /draft-envelope/mail-from
        Holds elements of the mail-from portion of the envelope.

    /draft-envelope/mail-from/<address>
        Is named and contains the address, not including angle brackets,
        to be sent in the MAIL FROM command.  Note that the value of
        this attribute is identical to its name.










Gellens                    [Page 6]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


    /draft-envelope/mail-from/<address>/dsn
        Contains the DSN extension values to be used with this MAIL
        FROM.

    /draft-envelope/mail-from/<address>/$status
        Contains the response code and text returned by the submit
        server to the MAIL FROM command.  It is placed under the
        <address> sub-entry to be consistent with the handling of RCPT
        TO entries.  This entry has no value until the SUBMIT command is
        used on this message.  If a new SUBMIT command is issued
        following a previous one, the server must only return the
        updated status.

    /draft-envelope/rcpt-to
        Holds elements of the rcpt-to portions of the envelope.

    /draft-envelope/rcpt-to/<address>
        Is named and contains the address of this recipient.  Note that
        the value of this attribute is identical to its name.

    /draft-envelope/rcpt-to/<address>/dsn
        Contains the DSN extension parameters and values for this
        recipient.

    /draft-envelope/rcpt-to/<address>/$status
        Contains the response code and text returned by the submit
        server to this RCPT TO command.  This entry has no value until
        the SUBMIT command is used on this message.  If a new SUBMIT
        command is issued following a previous one, the server must only
        return the updated status.

    Note that SMTP/submit extensions are specified as entries under the
    command being extended.  The IMAP server SHOULD process all entries
    which do not start with "$" under
    "/draft-envelope/mail-from/<address>" and
    "/draft-envelope/rcpt-to/<address>" as extensions without trying to
    recognize them.  This allows new extensions to be introduced without
    modifying the IMAP server.  Note that new submit command may be
    defined in the future.  Such commands would have their own entries
    under "/draft-envelope".  Since it is conceivable that such commands
    would be used in place of MAIL FROM or RCPT TO, the IMAP server
    SHOULD NOT process unrecognized entries under "/draft-envelope" but
    instead SHOULD return a BAD response to the SUBMIT command.








Gellens                    [Page 7]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


    Example:

    C: a FETCH 12 (ANNOTATION ("/draft-envelope/*" "value.priv"))
    S: * 12 FETCH (ANNOTATION
         ("/draft-envelope/$state" ("value.priv" "rejected")
          "/draft-envelope/mail-from/schlmo@example.com"
                ("value.priv" "schlmo@example.com")
          "/draft-envelope/mail-from/schlmo@example.com/dsn"
                ("value.priv" "ENVID 00BADBAD00")
          "/draft-envelope/mail-from/schlmo@example.com/$status"
                ("value.priv" "250 2.1.0 sender ok")
          "/draft-envelope/rcpt-to/b1ff@example.com"
                ("value.priv" "b1ff@example.com")
          "/draft-envelope/rcpt-to/b1ff@example.com/dsn"
                ("value.priv" "NOTIFY=success")
          "/draft-envelope/rcpt-to/b1ff@example.com/$status"
                ("value.priv" "550 5.1.1 User unknown")))


6.2.1.  Security Considerations

    This approach requires that the submit server trust the IMAP server
    to submit messages on behalf of the end user.  In addition, since
    new functionality is being added to IMAP, including expansion of
    referenced data, implementation errors have the potential to create
    vulnerabilities that could compromise the IMAP server, giving access
    to all of the user's IMAP data, all IMAP data for all users, or root
    access to the system.


7.  IANA Considerations

    The hard-working IANA staff is kindly requested to add "SUBMIT" to
    the IMAP4 capabilities registry with a reference to this document.


8.  Acknowledgements

    The editor is grateful for and would like to acknowledge the
    significant contributions made to this document by several members
    of the lemonade group, most especially Cyrus Daboo.










Gellens                    [Page 8]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


9.  Normative References

    [binary SMTP] "SMTP Service Extensions for Transmission of Large and
    Binary MIME Messages", G. Vaudreuil, December 2000, RFC 3030.

    [BURL] Newman, C., "Message Composition",
    draft-newman-lemonade-compose-xx (work in progress).

    [DSN] "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) Service Extension for
    Delivery Status Notifications (DSNs)", K. Moore, January 2003, RFC
    3461

    [IMAP] "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL -- VERSION 4rev1", M.
    Crispin, March 2003, RFC 3501.

    [message submission] "Message Submission", R. Gellens, J. Klensin,
    December 1998, RFC 2476.

    [URL access-type] "Definition of the URL MIME External-Body
    Access-Type", N. Freed, K. Moore, A. Cargille, October 1996, RFC
    2017.

    [URLAUTH] Crispin, Newman, "Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP)
    - URLAUTH Extension", draft-crispin-imap-urlauth-xx (work in
    progress).


10.  Informative References

    [annotate] Gellens, Daboo, "IMAP ANNOTATE Extension" (work in
    progress).

    [ANNOTATEMORE] Daboo, (work in progress).

    [CATENATE] Resnick,

    [mailbox referrals] "IMAP4 Mailbox Referrals", M. Gahrns, September
    1997, RFC 2193.

    [SMTP] "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", J. Klensin, Ed., April 2001,
    RFC 2821.










Gellens                    [Page 9]                    Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


11.  Editor's Address

    Randall Gellens
    QUALCOMM Incorporated
    5775 Morehouse Drive
    San Diego, CA  92121
    USA
    randy@qualcomm.com


Intellectual Property Statement

    The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
    intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
    pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
    this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
    might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
    has made any effort to identify any such rights.  Information on the
    IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
    standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11.  Copies of
    claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances
    of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made
    to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
    proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification
    can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

    The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
    copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
    rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
    this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive
    Director.


Full Copyright Statement

    Copyright (C) The Internet Society 2003.  All Rights Reserved.

    This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
    others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
    or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
    and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
    kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
    are included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
    document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
    the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
    Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
    developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
    copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
    followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than


Gellens                   [Page 10]                   Expires June 2004

Internet Draft           IMAP Message Submission           December 2003


    English.

    The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
    revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

    This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
    "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
    TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
    BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
    HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
    MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.








































Gellens                   [Page 11]                   Expires June 2004


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/