Subject: [Simple] IM URI to SIP URI

From: "Noble Antony T" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 10:45:54 +0530

Hi,

  I need some clarifications about the conversion of IM URI to SIP URI.
Thanks in advance...

According to RCF3861

3. Address Resolution <http://rfc.net/rfc3861.html#s3.>

  *The symbolic name used in the Service field of the SRV record is
  "_im" for instant messaging... However, the advertisement of these
  services in the DNS is incomplete if it does not include the protocol
  that will be used to instantiate the instant messaging or presence
  operations...

... the Protocol field of the SRV record contains an
  IANA-registered label corresponding to the underlying instant
  messaging or presence protocol being advertised.
*

I need to send a MESSAGE with a request URI
       im:[email-masked]
and it is to be resolved into corresponding SIP URI.

what should I query to get the corresponding SIP URI..?

waiting for your valuable reply...

Thanks..
-- 
Noble Antony Thattil,
_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2007 09:58:43 -0700

Noble Antony T wrote:
>   /The symbolic name used in the Service field of the SRV record is
> /
>        im:[email-masked] <mailto:im:[email-masked]>

I agree that this is a bit confusing. Unlike resolution of (say) an
http: or mailto: URI, there are several steps involved in resolution of
an im: URI.

If you have im:[email-masked] then you need to resolve that to an
address for a registered IM protocol:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/im-srv-labels

Surprisingly, there is only one registered IM protocol: XMPP. Did
someone forget to register SIP/SIMPLE?

Assuming that SIP/SIMPLE will be registered (and assuming that the
registered <Proto> label will be "_sip") then you would attempt to
resolve the target domain per Section 3 of RFC 3861. So you would
attempt to resolve the following:

_im._sip.example.com.

That would result in a resolution to a domain that handles SIMPLE IM
traffic for example.com, such as perhaps simple.example.com.

Thus im:[email-masked] would resolve to sip:[email-masked].

Or at least that is my understanding. Perhaps Jon Peterson is a better
person to ask, since he authored RFCs 3859, 3860, and 3861.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: "Noble Antony T" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2007 13:51:14 +0530

Thanks Peter,

  Thanks for your reply, waiting for Mr. Jon Peterson's response,

Noble  Antony T.

-- 
Noble Antony T,
Starent Networks, Bangalore.

Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts
can be counted. (Albert Einstein)
_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple