draft-ietf-sieve-notify-presence-01.txt   draft-ietf-sieve-notify-presence-02.txt 
Sieve working group R. George Sieve working group R. George
Internet-Draft Internet-Draft
Intended status: Standards Track B. Leiba Intended status: Standards Track B. Leiba
Expires: April 15, 2011 Huawei Technologies Expires: April 17, 2011 Huawei Technologies
October 12, 2010 October 14, 2010
Sieve Notification Using Presence Information Sieve Notification Using Presence Information
draft-ietf-sieve-notify-presence-01 draft-ietf-sieve-notify-presence-02
Abstract Abstract
This is a further extension to the Sieve mail filtering language This is a further extension to the Sieve mail filtering language
Notification extension, defining presence information that may be Notification extension, defining presence information that may be
checked through the notify_method_capability feature. checked through the notify_method_capability feature.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 33
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 15, 2011. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 17, 2011.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 18 skipping to change at page 2, line 18
1.1. Terminology Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Terminology Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Testing presence information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Testing presence information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Sometimes, it's desirable to tailor Sieve [RFC5228] notifications to Sometimes, it's desirable to tailor Sieve [RFC5228] notifications to
a user's current situation. Presence information provides some a user's current situation. Presence information provides some
information about the user that would be useful to have access to in information about the user that would be useful to have access to in
these cases. The Notification extension [RFC5435] defines a these cases. The Notification extension [RFC5435] defines a
mechanism to test for presence (the notify_method_capability mechanism to test for presence (the notify_method_capability
feature), and defines one test for presence (the "online" feature), and defines one test for presence (the "online"
notification-capability, described in Section 5 of RFC 5435). This notification-capability, described in Section 5 of RFC 5435). This
skipping to change at page 3, line 35 skipping to change at page 3, line 35
This extension uses the "notify_method_capability" test, as defined This extension uses the "notify_method_capability" test, as defined
in the Sieve [RFC5228] Notify extension [RFC5435], to test presence in the Sieve [RFC5228] Notify extension [RFC5435], to test presence
information. When a Sieve event occurs (mail arrives) for a user, a information. When a Sieve event occurs (mail arrives) for a user, a
Sieve script running on behalf of that user can present the user's Sieve script running on behalf of that user can present the user's
presence URI (in the "notification-uri" parameter) and test a presence URI (in the "notification-uri" parameter) and test a
specific item of notification presence as defined below (in the specific item of notification presence as defined below (in the
"notification-capability" parameter) against one or more values (in "notification-capability" parameter) against one or more values (in
the "key-list" parameter). the "key-list" parameter).
This document defines the following items of notification presence, This document defines a set of items of notification presence, which
which may be specified in the notification-capability parameter: may be specified in the notification-capability parameter. The
script tests the values of notification presence items in the key-
list parameter. The values that each item may have are specified in
the list below; Note that in addition to the presence values, any
item may have the value "unknown" if it is not possible to determine
the correct presence value of the item.
If a particular presence item is tested multiple times within the
same script execution context, implementations MUST present the same
value each time (for example, by caching the value on first use).
This provides consistency within a single execution.
Supported presence items are as follows:
busy - An indication of whether the user is considered "busy" now busy - An indication of whether the user is considered "busy" now
(the value "yes") or not (the value "no"). The meaning of (the value "yes") or not (the value "no"), or "unknown" if it
"busy" is left to the implementation, and may be a state that's cannot be determined. The meaning of "busy" is left to the
synthesized from other information (including "show", below). implementation, and may be a state that's synthesized from other
information (including "show", below).
show - The availability status of the user, formally specified. Note show - The availability status of the user, formally specified. Note
that this is similar to the presence element with the same name that this is similar to the presence element with the same name
that's defined in Section 2.2.2.1 of RFC 3921.[RFC3921] The that's defined in Section 2.2.2.1 of RFC 3921.[RFC3921] The
value of this item is one of the following: value of this item is one of the following:
away - The user is temporarily away. away - The user is temporarily away.
chat - The user is online and actively interested in chatting. chat - The user is online and actively interested in chatting.
dnd - Do Not Disturb; the user should not be disturbed now. dnd - Do Not Disturb; the user should not be disturbed now.
offline - The user is offline. offline - The user is offline.
xa - The user is away for an extended period (xa = "eXtended xa - The user is away for an extended period (xa = "eXtended
Away"). Away").
unknown - The correct presence value could not be determined.
status - A human-readable description of the user's availability status - A human-readable description of the user's availability
status. There is no formal definition for the values this item status. There is no formal definition for the values this item
may take. It is free-form, and may be in any language. Direct may take. It is free-form, and may be in any language. Direct
comparisons against the value of this field are unlikely to be comparisons against the value of this field are unlikely to be
useful; rather, it is provided to enable extraction of the value useful; rather, it is provided to enable extraction of the value
into a variable [RFC5229] for use elsewhere (see example 3 in into a variable [RFC5229] for use elsewhere (see example 3 in
Section 3). Note that this is similar to the presence element Section 3). Note that this is similar to the presence element
with the same name that's defined in Section 2.2.2.2 of RFC with the same name that's defined in Section 2.2.2.2 of RFC
3921.[RFC3921] 3921.[RFC3921]
The script tests the values of notification presence items in the
key-list parameter. The values that each item may have are specified
in the list above; in addition, any item may have the value
"unknown", if it is not possible to determine the correct value of
the item.
There is no capability string associated with this extension, but There is no capability string associated with this extension, but
this requires support for "enotify".[RFC5435] If the implementation this requires support for "enotify".[RFC5435] If the implementation
does not support the item being tested, RFC 5435 already specifies does not support the item being tested, RFC 5435 already specifies
that the test fail without an error. that the test fail without an error.
Although this feature was conceived to assist in notifications, and Although this feature was conceived to assist in notifications, and
the test requires support of the Sieve Notify feature, it is only a the test requires support of the Sieve Notify feature, it is only a
condition test, and any Sieve action can appear inside it. There are condition test, and any Sieve action can appear inside it. There are
no Sieve actions that conflict with this extension. no Sieve actions that conflict with this extension.
skipping to change at page 7, line 21 skipping to change at page 7, line 43
[RFC5435] Melnikov, A., Leiba, B., Segmuller, W., and T. Martin, [RFC5435] Melnikov, A., Leiba, B., Segmuller, W., and T. Martin,
"Sieve Email Filtering: Extension for Notifications", "Sieve Email Filtering: Extension for Notifications",
RFC 5435, January 2009. RFC 5435, January 2009.
7.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-sieve-autoreply] [I-D.ietf-sieve-autoreply]
George, R., Leiba, B., and A. Melnikov, "Sieve Email George, R., Leiba, B., and A. Melnikov, "Sieve Email
Filtering: Use of Presence Information with Auto Responder Filtering: Use of Presence Information with Auto Responder
functionality", draft-ietf-sieve-autoreply-00 (work in functionality", draft-ietf-sieve-autoreply-02 (work in
progress), June 2010. progress), October 2010.
[I-D.ietf-sieve-external-lists] [I-D.ietf-sieve-external-lists]
Melnikov, A. and B. Leiba, "Sieve Extension: Externally Melnikov, A. and B. Leiba, "Sieve Extension: Externally
Stored Lists", draft-ietf-sieve-external-lists-02 (work in Stored Lists", draft-ietf-sieve-external-lists-02 (work in
progress), May 2010. progress), May 2010.
[RFC3921] Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "Extensible Messaging and Presence [RFC3921] Saint-Andre, P., Ed., "Extensible Messaging and Presence
Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence", Protocol (XMPP): Instant Messaging and Presence",
RFC 3921, October 2004. RFC 3921, October 2004.
 End of changes. 10 change blocks. 
19 lines changed or deleted 28 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.40. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/