Subject: RE: [Simple] MSRP: need for 202 Accepted status code?

From: "Nancy Greene (QC/EMC)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 14:37:54 -0600

In the same way that a SIP MESSAGE request can be answered with a 202
Accepted, a node implementing MSRP and acting on behalf of a recipient may
not want to indicate successful delivery with 200 OK - it may just want to
indicate it has accepted the message and will undertake to deliver it to the
intended recipient. 

For this reason, I think that 202 Accepted should be listed in section 10 of
the MSRP I-D as a valid status-code in REPORT. 

I don't think 202 is needed as a possible response code to MSRP SEND though.
The one or more SENDs would have a "transaction status" of "200 OK", but
then the "request status" could easily be "202 Accepted, and not yet
delivered successfully".

Do others agree with adding 202 Accepted as a possible "request status" in
REPORT? Or is it expected that an interworking node would always wait for
successful delivery from the other messaging system before returning a
successful REPORT?

Nancy

-----Original Message-----
From: Nancy Greene (QC/EMC) 
Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 7:50 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Nancy Greene (QC/EMC)
Subject: MSRP: need for 202 Accepted status code?

When interworking with other messaging systems, it may be the case that the
node doing the interworking doesn't actually know if the message has been
successfully delivered. It just knows that the other system has taken over
responsibility for delivering it. Perhaps then it would be good to allow a
202 Accepted status-code in REPORT. 

Nancy

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

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:48:15 -0600

The semantics for 200 in MSRP mean exactly that--the message has been 
accepted. It explicitly does not mean that the message has been 
delivered. What circumstances would you envision needing another code?

On Nov 19, 2004, at 2:37 PM, Nancy Greene (QC/EMC) wrote:

> Accepted, a node implementing MSRP and acting on behalf of a recipient 
> may not want to indicate successful delivery with 200 OK - it may just 
> want to indicate it has accepted the message and will undertake to 
> deliver it to the intended recipient.
>
>  For this reason, I think that 202 Accepted should be listed in 
> section 10 of the MSRP I-D as a valid status-code in REPORT.
>
>  I don't think 202 is needed as a possible response code to MSRP SEND 
> though. The one or more SENDs would have a "transaction status" of 
> "200 OK", but then the "request status" could easily be "202 Accepted, 
> and not yet delivered successfully".
>
> Do others agree with adding 202 Accepted as a possible "request 
> status" in REPORT? Or is it expected that an interworking node would 
> always wait for successful delivery from the other messaging system 
> before returning a successful REPORT?
>
> Nancy
>
> When interworking with other messaging systems, it may be the case 
> that the node doing the interworking doesn't actually know if the 
> message has been successfully delivered. It just knows that the other 
> system has taken over responsibility for delivering it. Perhaps then 
> it would be good to allow a 202 Accepted status-code in REPORT.
>
>  Nancy
>
>

---

From: Alex Audu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 11:16:08 -0600

The message may have been accepted, but it hasn't yet been delivered.  
And in fact, it may still
fail the interworking process.  If an application depends on a 
successful end-to-end delivery of
the message, then a 200 OK may be misleading in this case.  I think we 
need something akin
to CALL-PROGRESS code in the telco world,..something to indicate 
clearly, that though the
message has been accepted, interworking is still going on. "202 Accepted 
and not yet delivered
successfully"  is a good idea in my view.

Regards,
Alex.

Ben Campbell wrote:

>> Accepted, a node implementing MSRP and acting on behalf of a 
>> recipient may not want to indicate successful delivery with 200 OK - 
>> it may just want to indicate it has accepted the message and will 
>> undertake to deliver it to the intended recipient.
>>
>> "200 OK", but then the "request status" could easily be "202 
>> Accepted, and not yet delivered successfully".
>>

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Nov 2004 18:38:26 -0500

Not only does the 200 already mean "accepted" or "received", but it only 
means it for the particular chunk of the whole message that it carries.

We already have something else to indicate that the *whole* message has 
been processed. It is a success report for the whole message.

	Paul