Subject: Re: [Simple] RE: Advanced IM requirements

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 01:44:26 -0500

Eric Burger wrote:
> I agree.  Again, this highlights why IMDN is at the CPIM, and not SIP, level.
> 
> Further, what is the use case for MDN in session mode?  Would anyone EVER use it?  I doubt it: if you are in a session, presumably you are interactive, which means you have OOB methods for knowing the message wasn't read (e.g., no response from the other person).

I agree it doesn't seem like something that normally would be used. But 
there may be some cases. I may want explicit confirmation that a 
particular message has not only been delivered, but read. (This might 
require the UAS to demand some explicit confirmation from the end user 
before sending the confirmation.)

Another case is with an IM conference. If I send a message to the mixer, 
requesting confirmation, ideally that would be an end-to-all-ends 
confirmation. The mixer would have to request and receive confirmation 
from all recipients before confirming to sender.

> Given that assertion, can we say IMDN's are page mode messages.

Based on above, I say NO.

	Paul

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 01:44:26 -0500

Paul

---

From: "Niemi Aki (Nokia-M/Espoo)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 10:41:57 +0200

ext Paul Kyzivat wrote:
>> Further, what is the use case for MDN in session mode?  Would anyone 
>> EVER use it?  I doubt it: if you are in a session, presumably you are 
>> interactive, which means you have OOB methods for knowing the message 
>> wasn't read (e.g., no response from the other person).
> 
> 

I agree this is possible, not sure it's that useful though. I don't 
think there is really a need for any protocol machinery here, but it is 
best handled in the traditional way, similarly to a voice call:

-"Did you understand what I just wrote?"

> Based on above, I say NO.

I'd say yes, but that doesn't mean CPIM level reports should not be 
defined. There is still the case of these notifications needing to 
traverse CPIM gateways. I think that is still the most valid use case 
speaking in favor of CPIM-level read reports.

Cheers,
Aki

---

From: "Niemi Aki (Nokia-M/Espoo)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 10:41:57 +0200

Cheers,
Aki