Subject: [lemonade] Food for thought - Notifications and Filters

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2007 02:12:53 -0400

This stuff is pretty central to satisfying OMA MEM.  However, it is more of
an architecture and how-to guide than an actual protocol.

Should this be a separate draft anyway, or part of the profile-bis document?

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lemonade-notifications-04

Notice:  This email message, together with any attachments, may contain information  of  BEA Systems,  Inc.,  its subsidiaries  and  affiliated entities,  that may be confidential,  proprietary,  copyrighted  and/or legally privileged, and is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this message in error, please immediately return this by email and then delete it.

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade
Supplemental Web Site:
http://www.standardstrack.com/ietf/lemonade

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 14:58:17 +0100

>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lemonade-notifications-04
As a document editor I think they should be separate, as work on
out-of-band notifications might significantly delay publication of the
Profile Bis document.

On the other hand I think the Profile Bis document should reference
draft-ietf-lemonade-notifications informally. Informally, because there
is no single notification protocol that the WG can agree on. And even if
we can agree on a single protocol, currently there is no document
describing how Lemonade notifications can be represented/carried by such
protocol.

---

From: Eric Burger <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 08:00:16 -0500

Upon re-re-reading it, I agree.

It does need to be updated to reflect context.

Here is something to keep the thread alive: I have always personally hated
"inband" and "outband".  For that matter, "outband" sounds like "out of your
mind."

How about "in IMAP" and "outside IMAP" for inband and outband, respectively?

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 09:04:01 -0700

>  describing how Lemonade notifications can be represented/carried by such

I'm not sure the notifications protocol is the most important issue. 
I think there are essentially three major issues in notifications 
from a lemonade perspective: First, how does the server know for 
which events it should generate a notification; second, to what 
address is the notification sent; and third, what is the 
format/content of the notification.  A fourth issue, what is the 
protocol used to send the notification, is less important, since if 
the first three are standardized, the fourth can be left for later to 
see what shakes out.

Notifications is vital for a push email user experience.  As much as 
I'd like to say "just use IMAP IDLE over a long-lived TCP connection 
with traffic channel dormancy mode," there are environments where 
this just isn't supported or it doesn't work well.  There are 
deployments today of various ad-hoc solutions, often some variant of 
"send an SMS when new mail arrives in the Inbox."

I share the concerns over delaying the Profile document, but I wonder 
if there isn't some very minimal specification that would be roughly 
equivalent to what has been deployed now, which we could adopt or at 
least refer to.  This would be much better than nothing, even if it 
falls far short of what can be done with whatever BIFF BOF does.
-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
A child of five would understand this.  Send somebody to
fetch a child of five.        --Groucho Marx, _Duck Soup_

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 09:04:58 -0700

>  How about "in IMAP" and "outside IMAP" for inband and outband, respectively?

Works for me.
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
Magpie:  A bird whose thievish disposition suggested to someone
that it might be taught to talk.

---

From: "Vaudreuil, Greg M \(Greg\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 11:15:10 -0500

>falls far short of what can be done with whatever BIFF BOF does.

It seems the out-of-band SMS-kick notification is equivalent in most
respect to the BIFF problem statement... why do you think we can do
something more quickly?  

Greg V.

---

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 12:01:58 -0700

>  respect to the BIFF problem statement... why do you think we can do

I'm not clear that the two are the same.  Certainly the fact that 
BIFF assumes/requires SIP/XMPP to the client, it seems to be a 
different problem than the very-trivial-kick that lemonade had been 
talking about.
-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
Afternoon: That part of the day we spend worrying about how we wasted
the morning.