Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2

draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2



     Network Working Group                                 Greg Vaudreuil 
       Internet Draft                                 Lucent Technologies 
       Expires in six months                                Glenn Parsons 
       Obsoletes: RFC 2421, 2423                          Nortel Networks 
                                                        February 14, 2002 
                                            

                      Voice Profile for Internet Mail - version 2 

                           <draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-05.txt> 

     Status of this Memo 

       This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all 
       provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 

       This document is an Internet Draft.  Internet Drafts are working 
       documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas, and 
       its Working Groups.  Note that other groups may also distribute working 
       documents as Internet Drafts. 

       Internet Drafts are valid for a maximum of six months and may be 
       updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time.  It is 
       inappropriate to use Internet Drafts as reference material or to cite 
       them other than as a "work in progress". 

       To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the 
       "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow 
       Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), nic.nordu.net (Europe), 
       munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim), ds.internic.net (US East Coast), or 
       ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast). 

     Abstract  

       This document specifies a restricted profile of the Internet multimedia 
       messaging protocols for use between voice processing server platforms.     
       These platforms have historically been special-purpose computers and 
       often do not have the same facilities normally associated with a 
       traditional Internet Email-capable computer.  As a result, VPIM also 
       specifies additional functionality, as it is needed.  This profile is 
       intended to specify the minimum common set of features to allow 
       interworking between conforming systems.  

       This document obsoletes RFC 2421 and describes version 2 of the profile 
       with greater precision.  No protocol changes were made in this revision. 
       A list of changes from RFC 2421 are noted in Appendix F.  Appendix A 
       summarizes the protocol profiles of this version of VPIM. 

     Copyright Notice 

       Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  All Rights Reserved. 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

      Table of Contents 

     1.   INTRODUCTION......................................................3 
      1.1  Voice Messaging System Limitations ..............................4 
      1.2  Design Goals ....................................................5 
      1.3  Applicability for VPIM ..........................................5 
     2.   REQUIREMENTS LANGUAGE.............................................6 
     3.   PROTOCOL RESTRICTIONS.............................................6 
     4.   VOICE MESSAGE INTERCHANGE FORMAT..................................7 
      4.1  VPIM Message Addressing Formats .................................7 
      4.2  Message Header Fields ..........................................11 
      4.3  MIME Audio Content Descriptions ................................19 
      4.4  Voice Message Content Types ....................................21 
      4.5  Other MIME Contents ............................................25 
      4.6  Delivery Status Notification (DSN) .............................27 
      4.7  Message Disposition Notification (MDN) .........................28 
      4.8  Forwarded Messages .............................................28 
      4.9  Reply Messages .................................................29 
     5.   MESSAGE TRANSPORT PROTOCOL.......................................30 
      5.1  Base SMTP Protocol .............................................30 
      5.2  SMTP Service Extensions ........................................30 
      5.3  ESMTP - SMTP Downgrading .......................................32 
     6.   DIRECTORY ADDRESS RESOLUTION.....................................33 
     7.   MANAGEMENT PROTOCOLS.............................................33 
      7.1  Network Management .............................................33 
     8.   CONFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS.........................................34 
     9.   SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS..........................................35 
      9.1  General Directive ..............................................35 
      9.2  Threats and Problems ...........................................35 
      9.3  Security Techniques ............................................36 
     10.  REFERENCES.......................................................37 
     11.  ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..................................................40 
     12.  COPYRIGHT NOTICE.................................................40 
     13.  AUTHORS' ADDRESSES...............................................41 
     14.  APPENDIX A - VPIM REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY...........................42 
     15.  APPENDIX B - EXAMPLE VOICE MESSAGES..............................49 
     16.  APPENDIX C - EXAMPLE ERROR VOICE PROCESSING ERROR CODES..........55 
     17.  APPENDIX D - EXAMPLE VOICE PROCESSING DISPOSITION TYPES..........57 
     18.  APPENDIX E - IANA REGISTRATIONS..................................58 
      18.1   Voice Content-Disposition Parameter Definition ...............58 
      18.2   Multipart/Voice-Message MIME Media Type Definition ...........59 
     19.  APPENDIX F - CHANGE HISTORY: RFC 2421 (VPIM V2) TO THIS DOCUMENT.61 
       








        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 2] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     1. Introduction 

       MIME is the Internet multipurpose, multimedia-messaging standard.  This 
       document explicitly recognizes its capabilities and provides a mechanism 
       for the exchange of various messaging technologies, primarily voice and 
       facsimile. 

       Voice messaging evolved as telephone answering service into a full send, 
       receive, and forward messaging paradigm with unique message features, 
       semantics and usage patterns. Voice messaging was introduced on special 
       purpose computers that interface to a telephone switch and provide call 
       answering and voice messaging services.  Traditionally, messages sent 
       from one voice messaging system to another were transported using analog 
       networking protocols based on DTMF signaling and analog voice playback.  
       As the demand for networking increases, there was a need for a standard 
       high-quality digital protocol to connect these machines.  VPIM has 
       successfully demonstrated its usefulness as this new standard.  VPIM is 
       widely implemented and is seeing deployment in customer networks. This 
       document clarifies ambiguities found in the earlier specification and is 
       consistent with implementation practice. The profile is referred to as 
       VPIM (Voice Profile for Internet Mail) in this document. 

       This document specifies a restricted profile of the Internet multimedia 
       messaging protocols for use between voice processing server platforms.  
       These platforms have historically been special-purpose computers and 
       often do not have the same facilities normally associated with a 
       traditional Internet Email-capable computer.  As a result, VPIM also 
       specifies additional functionality, as it is needed.  This profile is 
       intended to specify the minimum common set of features to allow 
       interworking between conforming systems. 

       This document obsoletes RFC 2421 and describes VPIM version 2 of with 
       greater precision.  No protocol changes were made in this revision. A 
       list of changes from RFC 2421 are noted in Appendix F.  Appendix A 
       summarizes the protocol profiles of this version of VPIM.  

       Please send comments on this document to the IETF VPIM mailing list:   

              vpim@lists.neystadt.org  

       Additional documents and background may be found on the VPIM web page:   

              http://www.vpim.org or http://www.ema.org/vpim  


        

        



        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 3] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     1.1 Voice Messaging System Limitations 

       The following are typical limitations of voice messaging platforms that 
       were considered in creating this baseline profile. 

          1) Text messages are not normally received and often cannot be easily 
          displayed or viewed.  They can often be processed only via text-to-
          speech or text-to-fax features not currently present in many of these 
          machines. 

          2) Voice mail machines usually act as an integrated Message Transfer 
          Agent, Message Store and User Agent.  There is typically no relaying 
          of messages. RFC822 header fields may have limited use in the context 
          of the limited messaging features currently deployed. 

          3) Voice mail message stores are generally not capable of preserving 
          the full semantics of an Internet message.  As such, use of a voice 
          mail machine for gatewaying is not supported.  In particular, storage 
          of recipient lists, "Received:" lines, and "Message-ID:" may be 
          limited. 

          4) Internet-style distribution/exploder mailing lists are not 
          typically supported.  Voice mail machines often implement only local 
          alias lists, with error-to-sender and reply-to-sender behavior.  
          Reply-all capabilities using a Cc list are not generally available. 

          5) Error reports must be machine-parsable so that helpful responses 
          can be voiced to users whose only access mechanism is a telephone. 

          6) The voice mail systems generally limit address entry to 16 or fewer 
          numeric characters, and normally do not support alphanumeric mailbox 
          names.  Alpha characters are not generally used for mailbox 
          identification, as they cannot be easily entered from a telephone 
          terminal. 

       It should be noted that newer systems are based natively on SMTP/MIME 
       and do not suffer these limitations.  In particular, some systems may 
       support media other than voice and fax. 













        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 4] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     1.2 Design Goals 

       It is a goal of this profile to make as few restrictions and additions 
       to the existing Internet mail protocols as possible while satisfying the 
       requirements for interoperability with current generation voice 
       messaging systems.  This goal is motivated by the desire to increase the 
       accessibility to digital messaging by enabling the use of proven 
       existing networking software for rapid development. 

       This specification is intended for use on a TCP/IP network; however, it 
       is possible to use the SMTP protocol suite over other transport 
       protocols.  The necessary protocol parameters for such use are outside 
       the scope of this document. 

       This profile is intended to be robust enough to be used in an 
       environment, such as the global Internet, with installed-base gateways 
       that do not understand MIME.  Full functionality, such as reliable error 
       messages and binary transport, will require careful selection of 
       gateways (e.g., via MX records) to be used as VPIM forwarding agents.  
       Nothing in this document precludes use of general-purpose MIME email 
       packages to read and compose VPIM messages.  While no special 
       configuration is required to receive VPIM conforming messages, some may 
       be required to originate conforming structures. 

       It is expected that a system administrator who can perform TCP/IP 
       network configuration will manage a VPIM messaging system.  When using 
       facsimile or multiple voice encodings, it is suggested that the system 
       administrator maintain a list of the capabilities of the networked mail 
       machines to reduce the sending of undeliverable messages due to lack of 
       feature support.  Configuration, implementation and management of these 
       directory-listing capabilities are local matters.  

     1.3 Applicability for VPIM 

       VPIM is intended for the exchange of voice messages between traditional 
       voice messaging systems and for systems that need to interoperate with 
       such systems.  VPIM is intended connect voice-messaging systems into 
       special-purpose voice messaging networks.  VPIM may also be used between 
       message store servers and VPIM-aware clients such as web servers, TUI, 
       and GUI clients.  VPIM is not intended or optimized for downloading to, 
       or sending from commercial email clients.  

       Internet Voice Messaging, the subject of a separate standards 
       initiative, is intended to enable general-purpose email clients to send 
       and receive voice content through general-purpose message stores in an 
       interoperable way. IVM may also be a suitable format for downloading 
       voice messages from a VPIM server to a commercial email client.  It may 
       also be a suitable format for submission of a voice message from a 
       general-purpose client into a VPIM system.   

      
        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 5] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     2. Requirements Language 

       The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 
       "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 
       document are to be interpreted as described in [REQ]. 

     3. Protocol Restrictions 

       This protocol does not limit the number of recipients per message.  
       Where possible, server implementations should not restrict the number of 
       recipients in a single message.  It is recognized that no implementation 
       supports unlimited recipients, and that the number of supported 
       recipients may be quite low.   

       This protocol does not limit the maximum message length.  Implementers 
       should understand that some machines will be unable to accept 
       excessively long messages.  A mechanism is defined in [SIZE] to declare 
       the maximum message size supported.  

       The following sections describe the restrictions and additions to 
       Internet mail protocols that are required to be conforming with this 
       VPIM v2 profile. Though various SMTP, ESMTP and MIME features are 
       described here, the implementer is referred to the relevant RFCs for 
       complete details. The table in Appendix A summarizes the protocol 
       details of this profile. 


























        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 6] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4. Voice Message Interchange Format 

       The voice message interchange format is a profile of the Internet Mail 
       Protocol Suite.  Any Internet Mail message containing the format defined 
       in this section is referred to as a VPIM Message in this document.  As a 
       result, this document assumes an understanding of the Internet Mail 
       specifications.  Specifically, VPIM references components from the 
       message format standard for Internet messages [RFC822], the Multipurpose 
       Internet Message Extensions [MIME1-5], the X.400 gateway specification 
       [X.400], and the delivery status and message disposition notifications 
       [REPORT][DSN][DRPT][STATUS][MDN]. 

       MIME, introduced in [MIME1], is a general-purpose message body format 
       that is extensible to carry a wide range of body parts.  It provides for 
       encoding binary data so that it can be transported over the 7-bit text-
       oriented SMTP protocol.  This transport encoding (denoted by the 
       "Content-Transfer-Encoding:" MIME field) is in addition to the audio 
       encoding required to generate a binary object.  

       MIME defines two transport-encoding mechanisms to transform binary data 
       into a 7-bit representation, one designed for text-like data ("Quoted-
       Printable"), and one for arbitrary binary data ("Base64").  While Base64 
       is dramatically more efficient for audio data, either will work.  Where 
       binary transport is available, no transport encoding is needed, and the 
       data can be labeled as "Binary". 

     4.1 VPIM Message Addressing Formats 

       VPIM addresses SHALL use the RFC 822 format based on the Domain Name 
       System.  This naming system has two components: the local part, used for 
       username or mailbox identification; and the host part, used for global 
       machine identification. 

     4.1.1 VPIM Addresses 

       The local part of the address shall be a US-ASCII string uniquely 
       identifying a mailbox on a destination system.  For voice messaging, the 
       local part SHALL be a printable string containing the mailbox ID of the 
       originator or recipient.  While alpha characters and long mailbox 
       identifiers MAY be permitted, short numeric local parts SHOULD be used 
       as most voice mail networks rely on numeric mailbox identifiers to 
       retain compatibility with the limited 10-digit telephone keypad.  As a 
       result, some voice messaging systems may only be able to handle a 
       numeric local part.  The reception of alphanumeric local parts on these 
       systems may result in the address being mapped to some locally unique 
       (but confusing to the recipient) number or, in the worst case the 
       address could be deleted making the message unreplyable.  Additionally, 
       it may be difficult to create messages on these systems with an 
       alphanumeric local part without complex key sequences or some form of 
       directory lookup (see 6).  

        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 7] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       The use of the Domain Name System should be transparent to the user.  It 
       is the responsibility of the voice mail machine to lookup the fully-
       qualified domain name (FQDN) based on the address entered by the user 
       (see 6). 

       In the absence of a global directory, specification of the local part is 
       expected to conform to international or private telephone numbering 
       plans.  It is likely that private numbering plans will prevail and these 
       are left for local definition.  However, it is RECOMMENDED that public 
       telephone numbers be noted according to the international numbering plan 
       described in [E.164]. The indication that the local part is a public 
       telephone number is given by a preceding "+" (the "+" would not be 
       entered from a telephone keypad, it is added by the system as a flag).  
       Since the primary information in the numeric scheme is contained by the 
       digits, other character separators (e.g. "-") may be ignored (i.e. to 
       allow parsing of the numeric local mailbox) or may be used to recognize 
       distinct portions of the telephone number (e.g. country code).  The 
       specification of the local part of a VPIM address can be split into the 
       four groups described below: 
































        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 8] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

          1) mailbox number 
             - for use as a private numbering plan (any number of digits) 
             - e.g.  2722@lucent.com 

          2) mailbox number+extension 
             - for use as a private numbering plan with extensions 
               any number of digits, use of "+" as separator 
             - e.g.  2722+111@Lucent.com 

          3) +international number 
             - for international telephone numbers conforming to E.164 
               maximum of 15 digits 
             - e.g.  +16137637582@vm.nortel.ca 

          4) +international number+extension 
               - for international telephone numbers conforming to E.164 
                 maximum of 15 digits, with an extension (e.g. behind a 
                 PBX) that has a maximum of 15 digits.  
               - e.g.  +17035245550+230@ema.org 

       Note that this address format is designed to be compatible with current 
       usage within the voice messaging industry.  It is not compatible with 
       the addressing formats of RFCs 2303-2304.  It is expected that as 
       telephony services become more widespread on the Internet, these 
       addressing formats will converge. 

     4.1.2 Special Addresses 

       Special addresses to represent the sender are provided for compatibility 
       with the conventions of Internet mail.  These addresses do not use 
       numeric local addresses, both to conform to current Internet practice 
       and to avoid conflict with existing numeric addressing plans. Two 
       special addresses are RESERVED for use as follows: 

       postmaster@domain 

       By convention, a special mailbox named "postmaster" MUST exist on all 
       systems.  This address is used for diagnostics and should be checked 
       regularly by the system manager. This mailbox is particularly likely to 
       receive text messages, which is not normal on a voice-processing 
       platform.  The specific handling of these messages is an individual 
       implementation choice. 

       non-mail-user@domain 







        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002              [Page 9] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       If a reply to a message is not possible, such as a telephone-answering 
       message, then the special address "non-mail-user" SHOULD be used as the 
       originator's address.  Any text name such as "Telephone Answering", or 
       the telephone number if it is available, is permitted.  This special 
       address is used as a token to indicate an unreachable originator. A 
       conforming implementation MUST NOT permit a reply to an address from 
       "non-mail-user".  For compatibility with the installed base of mail user 
       agents, implementations MUST reject the message when a message addressed 
       to "non-mail-user" is received.  The status code for such NDN's is 5.1.1 
       "Mailbox does not exist".  

       Example: 

                    From: Telephone Answering <non-mail-user@mycompany.com> 

     4.1.3 Distribution Lists 

       There are many ways to handle distribution list (DL) expansions and none 
       are 'standard'.  A VPIM implementation MAY support DLs.  Using a simple 
       alias is a behavior closest to what many voice mail systems do today and 
       what is to be used with VPIM messages.  A couple of important features 
       that need special care when DLs are used are: 

          Reply to the originator - (Address in the RFC822 "Reply-To:" or  
                                     "From" field) 
          Errors to the submitter - (Address in the MAIL FROM field of the 
                                     ESMTP exchange or the "Return-Path:"  
                                     RFC822 field) 

       Some proprietary voice messaging protocols include only the recipient of 
       the particular copy in the envelope and include no "header fields" 
       except date and per-message features.  Most voice messaging systems do 
       not provide for "Header Information" in their messaging queues and only 
       include delivery information.  As a result, recipient information MAY be 
       in either the "To:" or "Cc:" header fields. If all recipients cannot be 
       presented then the recipient header fields SHOULD be omitted to indicate 
       that an accurate list of recipients (e.g. for use with a reply-all 
       capability) is not known. 













        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 10] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.2 Message Header Fields 

       Internet messages contain a header information block.  This header block 
       contains information required to identify the sender, the list of 
       recipients, the message send time, and other information intended for 
       user presentation.  Except for specialized gateway and mailing list 
       cases, header fields do not indicate delivery options for the transport 
       of messages. 

       Distribution list processors are noted for modifying or adding to the 
       header fields of messages that pass through them.  VPIM systems MUST be 
       able to accept and ignore header fields that are not defined here. 

       The following header lines are permitted for use with VPIM messages: 

     4.2.1 From 

       SEND RULES 

       The originator's fully qualified domain address (a mailbox address 
       followed by the fully qualified domain name) MUST be present. Systems 
       conforming with this profile SHOULD provide the text personal name of 
       the voice message originator in a quoted phrase, if the name is 
       available.  Text names of corporate or positional mailboxes MAY be 
       provided as a simple string. From [RFC822] 

       Example: 

                    From: "Joe S. User" <12145551212@mycompany.com> 

                    From: Technical Support <611@serviceprovider.com> 

                    From: Non-mail-user@myserver.mycompany.com 

       Voice mail machines may not be able to support separate attributes for 
       the "From:" header fields and the SMTP MAIL FROM, VPIM-conforming 
       systems SHOULD set these values to the same address.  Use of addresses 
       different than those present in the "From:" header field address may 
       result in unanticipated behavior. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       The user listed in the "From:" field MUST be presented in the voice 
       message envelope of the voice messaging system as the originator of the 
       message, though the exact presentation is an implementation decision 
       (e.g., the mailbox ID or the text name MAY be presented). The "From:" 
       address SHOULD be used for replies (see 4.9).  




        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 11] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.2.2 To 

       The "To:" field contains the recipient's fully-qualified domain address. 
       Example: 

                    To: +12145551213@mycompany.com 

       SEND RULES 

       There MAY be one or more "To:" fields in any message. Systems SHOULD 
       provide a list of recipients only if all recipients are available.   

       Systems, such as gateways from protocols or legacy platforms that do not 
       indicate the complete list of recipients, MAY provide a "To:" line.  
       Because these systems cannot accurately enumerate all recipients in the 
       "To:" headers, recipients SHOULD NOT be enumerated.  

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Systems conforming to this profile MAY discard the addresses in the 
       "To:" fields if they are unable to store the information.  This would, 
       of course, make a reply-to-all capability impossible.  If present, the 
       addresses in the "To:" field MAY be used for a reply message to all 
       recipients.  

     4.2.3 Cc 

       The "Cc:" field contains additional recipients' fully qualified domain 
       addresses. Many voice mail systems maintain only sufficient envelope 
       information for message delivery and are not capable of storing or 
       providing a complete list of additional recipients. 

       SEND RULES 

       Conforming implementations MAY send "Cc:" lists if all recipients are 
       known at the time of origination. If not, systems SHOULD omit the "Cc:" 
       fields to indicate that the full list of recipients is unknown or 
       otherwise unavailable. The list of disclosed recipients MUST NOT include 
       undisclosed recipients (i.e., those sent via a blind copy). 

       Example: 

                    Cc: +12145551213@mycompany.com 








        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 12] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Systems conforming to this profile MAY add all the addresses in the 
       "Cc:" field to the "To:" field, others MAY discard the addresses in the 
       "Cc:" fields.    If a list of "Cc:" addresses is present, these 
       addresses MAY be used for a reply message to all recipients.  

     4.2.4 Date 

       The "Date:" field contains the date and time the message was sent by the 
       originator.  

       SEND RULES 

       The sending system MUST report the time the message was sent. The time 
       zone MUST be present and SHOULD be represented in a four-digit time zone 
       offset, such as -0500 for North American Eastern Standard Time.  This 
       MAY be supplemented by a time zone name in parentheses, e.g., "-0700 
       (PDT)". 

       Example: 

                    Date: Wed, 28 Jul 96 10:08:49 -0800 (PST) 

       If the VPIM sender is relaying a message from a system that does not 
       provide a time stamp, the time of arrival at the gateway system SHOULD 
       be used as the date. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Conforming implementations SHOULD be able to convert [RFC822] date and 
       time stamps into local time 

     4.2.5 Sender 

       The "Sender:" field contains the actual address of the originator if an 
       agent on behalf of the author indicated in the "From:" field sends the 
       message.  

       SEND RULES 

       This header field MAY be sent by VPIM-conforming systems.  









        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 13] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       RECEIVE RULES 

       If the address in the "Sender:" field cannot be preserved in the 
       recipient's message queues or in the next-hop protocol from a gateway, 
       the field MAY be silently discarded. 

     4.2.6 Return-Path 

       The "Return-path:" field is added by the final delivering SMTP server.  
       If present, it contains the address from the MAIL FROM parameter of the 
       ESMTP exchange (see[RFC822]). Any error messages resulting from the 
       delivery failure MUST be sent to this address.  Note that if the 
       "Return-path:" is null ("<>") (e.g., a call answer message would have no 
       return path) delivery status notifications MUST NOT be sent. 

       SEND RULES 

       The originating system MUST NOT add this header. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       If the receiving system is incapable of storing the return path (or MAIL 
       FROM) to be used for subsequent delivery errors (i.e., it is a gateway 
       to a legacy system or protocol), the receiving system must otherwise 
       ensure that further delivery errors don't happen. Systems that do not 
       support the return path MUST ensure that at the time the message is 
       acknowledged (i.e., when a DSN would be sent), the message is delivered 
       to the recipient's ultimate mailbox.  Non-Delivery notifications SHOULD 
       NOT be sent after that final delivery.  

     4.2.7 Message-id 

       The "Message-Id:" field contains a globally unique per-message 
       identifier.   

       SEND RULES 

       A globally unique message-id MUST be generated for each message sent 
       from a VPIM-conforming implementation. 

       Example: 

                    Message-Id: <12345678@mycompany.com> 








        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 14] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       RECEIVE RULES 

       When provided in the original message, it MUST be used when sending a 
       MDN.  This identifier MAY be used for tracking and auditing.  From 
       [RFC822] 

     4.2.8 Reply-To 

       If present, the "Reply-To:" header provides a preferred address to which 
       reply messages should be sent (see 4.9).  Typically, voice mail systems 
       can only support one originator of a message so it is likely that this 
       field will be ignored by the receiving system. From [RFC822] 

       SEND RULES 

       A conforming system SHOULD NOT send a "Reply-To:" header. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       If a "Reply-To:" field is present, a reply-to-sender message MAY be sent 
       to the address specified (that is, in lieu of the address in the "From:" 
       field). If the receiving system (e.g., multi-protocol gateway) only 
       supports one address for the originator  , then the address in the 
       "From:" field MUST be used and the "Reply-To:" field MAY be silently 
       discarded. 

     4.2.9 Received 

       The "Received:" field contains trace information added to the beginning 
       of a RFC822 message by MTAs.  This is the only field that may be added 
       by an MTA.  Information in this header is useful for debugging when 
       using an US-ASCII message reader or a header-parsing tool. From [RFC822] 

       SEND RULES 

       A VPIM-conforming system MUST add a "Received:" field. When acting as a 
       gateway, information about the system from which the message was 
       received SHOULD be included. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       A VPIM-conforming system MUST NOT remove any "Received:" fields when 
       relaying messages to other MTAs or gateways.  These header fields MAY be 
       ignored or deleted when the message is received at the final 
       destination. 






        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 15] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.2.10 MIME Version 

       The "MIME-Version:" field MUST be present to indicate that the message 
       conforms to [MIME]. Systems conforming with this specification SHOULD 
       include a comment with the words "(Voice 2.0)". [VPIM1] defines an 
       earlier version of this profile and uses the token (Voice 1.0).  
       Example: 

                    MIME-Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0) 

       This identifier is intended for information only and SHOULD NOT be used 
       to semantically identify the message as being a VPIM message.  Instead, 
       the presence of the multipart/voice-message content type defined in 
       section 18.2 SHOULD be used if identification is necessary. 

     4.2.11 Content-Type 

       The "Content-Type:" header MUST be present to declare the type of 
       content enclosed in the message. The typical top-level content in a VPIM 
       Message SHOULD be Multipart/Voice-Message.  The allowable contents are 
       detailed starting in section 4.4 of this document.  From [MIME2] 

     4.2.12 Content-Transfer-Encoding 

       Because Internet mail was initially specified to carry only 7-bit US-
       ASCII text, it may be necessary to encode voice and fax data into a 
       representation suitable for that environment.  The "Content-Transfer-
       Encoding:" header describes this transformation if it is needed. 

       SEND RULES 

       An implementation in conformance with this profile SHOULD send audio 
       and/or facsimile data in "Binary" form when binary message transport is 
       available (see section 5).  When binary transport is not available, 
       implementations MUST encode the audio and/or facsimile data as "Base64". 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Conforming implementations MUST recognize and decode the standard 
       encodings, "Binary" (when binary support is available), "7bit, "8bit", 
       "Base64" and "Quoted-Printable" per [MIME1].  The detection and decoding 
       of "Quoted-Printable", "7bit", and "8bit" MUST be supported in order to 
       meet MIME requirements and to preserve interoperability with the fullest 
       range of possible devices. 







        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 16] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.2.13 Sensitivity 

       The "Sensitivity:" field, if present, indicates the requested privacy 
       level. If no privacy is requested, this field is omitted.  The header 
       definition is as follows: 

       Sensitivity := "Sensitivity" ":" Sensitivity-value 

       Sensitivity-value := "Personal" / "Private" / "Company-Confidential" 

       SEND RULES 

       A VPIM-conforming implementation MAY include this header to indicate the 
       sensitivity of a message. If a user marks a message "Private", a 
       conforming implementation MUST send only the "Private" sensitivity 
       level. There are no VPIM-specific semantics defined for the values 
       "Personal" or "Company-Confidential". A conforming implementation SHOULD 
       NOT send the values "Personal" or "Company-Confidential". If the message 
       is of "Normal" sensitivity, this field SHOULD be omitted. From: [X.400] 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       If a "Sensitivity:" field with a value of "Private" is present in the 
       message, a conforming system MUST prohibit the recipient from forwarding 
       this message to any other user.  A conforming system, however, SHOULD 
       allow the responder to reply to a sensitive message, but SHOULD NOT 
       include the original message content.  The responder MAY set the 
       sensitivity of the reply message. 

       A receiving system MAY ignore sensitivity values of "Personal" and 
       "Company Confidential". 

       If the receiving system does not support privacy and the sensitivity is 
       "Private", a negative delivery status notification MUST be sent to the 
       originator with the appropriate status code (5.6.0) "Other or undefined 
       protocol status" indicating that privacy could not be assured. The 
       message contents SHOULD be returned to the sender to allow for a voice 
       context with the notification. A non-delivery notification to a private 
       message SHOULD NOT be tagged private since it will be sent to the 
       originator.  From: [X.400]  

       A message with no privacy explicitly noted (i.e., no header) or with 
       "Normal" sensitivity has no special treatment.  








        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 17] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.2.14 Importance 

       Indicates the requested importance to be given by the receiving system. 
       If no special importance is requested, this header MAY be omitted and 
       the value of the absent header assumed to be "normal". From: [X.400] 

       Importance := "Importance" ":" importance-value  

       Importance-value := "low" / "normal" / "high" 

       SEND RULES 

       Conforming implementations MAY include this header to indicate the 
       importance of a message.  

       RECEIVE RULES 

       If the receiving system does not support "Importance:", the attribute 
       MAY be silently dropped.  

     4.2.15 Subject 

       The "Subject:" field is often provided by email systems but is not 
       widely supported on voice mail platforms. From [RFC822] 

       SEND RULES 

       For compatibility with text-based mailbox interfaces, a text subject 
       field SHOULD be generated by a conforming implementation. It is 
       RECOMMENDED that voice-messaging systems that do not support any text 
       user interfaces (e.g., access only by a telephone) insert a generic 
       subject header of "VPIM Message" or "Voice Message" for the benefit of 
       GUI-enabled recipients. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       It is anticipated that many voice-only systems will be incapable of 
       storing the subject line. The subject MAY be discarded by a receiving 
       system. 












        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 18] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.3 MIME Audio Content Descriptions 

     4.3.1 Content-Description 

          This field MAY be present to facilitate the text identification of 
          these body parts in simple email readers.  Any values may be used.  

          Example: 

                    Content-Description: Big Telco Voice Message 

          SEND RULES 

          This field MAY be added to a voice body part to offer a freeform 
          description of the voice content. It is useful to incorporate the 
          values for Content-Disposition with additional descriptions.  For 
          example, this can be used to indicate product name or transcoding 
          records.  

          RECEIVE RULES 

          This field MAY be displayed to the recipient.  However, since it is 
          only informative it MAY be ignored.  

     4.3.2 Content-Disposition 

          This field MUST be present to allow the parsable identification of 
          body parts within a VPIM voice message.  This is especially useful if, 
          as is typical, more than one Audio/* body occurs within a single level 
          (e.g. Multipart/Voice-Message).  Since a VPIM voice message is 
          intended to be automatically played in the order in which the audio 
          contents occur, the audio contents MUST always be of disposition 
          inline.  However, it is still useful to include a filename value, so 
          this SHOULD be present if this information is available.  >From [DISP] 

          SEND RULES 

          In order to distinguish between the various types of audio contents in 
          a VPIM voice message a new disposition parameter "voice" is defined 
          with IANA (see section 18.1) with the parameter values below to be 
          used as appropriate:  

          Audio-Type := "voice" "=" Audio-type-value 

          Audio-type-value := "Voice-Message" / "Voice-Message-Notification" / 
          "Originator-Spoken-Name" /"Recipient-Spoken-Name" /"Spoken-Subject" 





        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 19] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

            Voice-Message - the primary voice message, 
            Voice-Message-Notification - a spoken delivery notification 
              or spoken disposition notification, 
            Originator-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the originator, 
            Recipient-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the recipient(s) if 
              available to the originator 
            Spoken-Subject- the spoken subject of the message, typically 
              spoken by the originator 

          Note that there SHOULD only be one instance of each of these types of 
          audio contents per message level.  Additional instances of a given 
          type (i.e., parameter value) MAY occur within an attached forwarded or 
          reply voice message.  If there are multiple recipients for a given 
          message, recipient-spoken-name MUST NOT be used. 

          RECEIVE RULES 

          Implementations SHOULD use this header.  However, those that do not 
          understand the "voice" parameter (or the "Content-Disposition:" 
          header) can safely ignore it, and will present the audio body parts in 
          order (but will not be able to distinguish between them). If more than 
          one instance of the "voice" parameter type value is encountered at one 
          level (e.g., multiple 'Voice-Message' tagged contents) then they 
          SHOULD be presented together. 

     4.3.3 Content-Duration 

          The "Content-Duration:" header provides an indication of the audio 
          length in seconds of the segment. 

          Example: 

                    Content-Duration: 33 

          SEND RULES 

          This field MAY be present to allow the specification of the length of 
          the audio body part in seconds.  

          RECEIVE RULES 

          The use of this field on reception is a local implementation issue.  
          From [DUR] 








        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 20] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.3.4 Content-Language: 

          This field MAY be present to allow the specification of the spoken 
          language of the audio body part.  The encoding is defined in [LANG].  

          Example for UK English: 

                    Content-Language: en-UK 

          SEND RULES 

          A sending system MAY add this field to indicate the language of the 
          voice.  The determination of this (e.g., automated or user-selected) 
          is a local implementation issue. 

          RECEIVE RULES 

          The use of this field on reception is a local implementation issue.  
          It MAY be used as a hint to the recipient (e.g., end-user or an 
          automated translation process) as to the language of the voice 
          message. 

     4.4 Voice Message Content Types 

       The content types described in this section are identified for use 
       within the Multipart/Voice-Message content.  This content is referred to 
       as a "VPIM message" in this document and is the fundamental part of a 
       "VPIM message". 

       Only the contents profiled can be sent within a VPIM voice message 
       construct (i.e., the Multipart/Voice-Message content type) to form a 
       simple or a more complex structure (several examples are given in 
       Appendix B).  The presence of other contents within a VPIM voice message 
       is not permitted. In the absence of a bilateral agreement, conforming 
       implementations MUST NOT create a message containing prohibited 
       contents. In the spirit of liberal acceptance, a conforming 
       implementation MAY accept and render prohibited content. Systems unable 
       to accept or render prohibited contents MAY discard the prohibited 
       contents as necessary to deliver the acceptable content. When multiple 
       contents are present within the Multipart/Voice-Message, they SHOULD be 
       presented to the user in the order that they appear in the message. 

       Some deployed implementations based on a common interpretation of the 
       original VPIM v2 specification reject messages with prohibited content 
       rather than discard the unsupported contents.  For interoperability with 
       these systems, it is especially important that prohibited contents not 
       be sent within a Multipart/Voice-Message.  




        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 21] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.4.1 Multipart/Voice-Message 

       This MIME multipart structure provides a mechanism for packaging a voice 
       message into one container that is tagged as VPIM v2 conforming.  The 
       sub-type is identical in semantics and syntax to multipart/mixed, as 
       defined in [MIME2]. As such, it may be safely interpreted as a 
       multipart/mixed by systems that do not understand the sub-type (only the 
       identification as a voice message would be lost). 

         
       In addition to the MIME required boundary parameter, a version parameter 
       is also required for this sub-type.  This is to distinguish this 
       refinement of the sub-type from the previous definition in [VPIM1].  The 
       value of the version parameter is "2.0" if the content conforms to the 
       requirements of this specification.  Should there be further revisions 
       of this content type, there MUST be backwards compatibility (i.e. 
       systems implementing version n can read version 2, and systems 
       implementing version 2 can read version 2 contents within a version n).   

       SEND RULES 

       The Multipart/Voice-Message content-type MUST only contain the profiled 
       media and content types specified in this section (i.e. Audio/*, 
       Image/*, and Message/RFC822).  The most common will be: spoken name, 
       spoken subject, the message itself, and an attached fax.  Forwarded 
       messages are created by simply using the Message/RFC822 construct.   

       Conformant implementations MUST use Multipart/Voice-Message in a VPIM 
       message.  In most cases, this Multipart/Voice-Message Content-Type will 
       be the top level but may be included within a Message/RFC822 if the 
       message is forwarded or within a multipart/mixed when more than one 
       message is being forwarded.  

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Conformant implementations MUST recognize the Multipart/Voice-Message 
       content (whether it is a top-level content or contained in a 
       Multipart/Mixed) and MUST be able to separate the contents (e.g. spoken 
       name or spoken subject). 

       The semantic of Multipart/Voice-Message (defined in section 18.2) is 
       identical to Multipart/Mixed and may be interpreted as that by systems 
       that do not recognize this content-type.  








        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 22] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.4.2 Message/RFC822 

       SEND RULES 

       MIME requires support of the Message/RFC822 message encapsulation body 
       part.  This body part SHOULD be used within a Multipart/Voice-Message to 
       forward complete messages (see 4.8) or to reply with original content 
       (see 4.9). From [MIME2] 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       The receiving system MUST accept this format and SHOULD treat this 
       attachment as a forwarded message. The receiving system MAY flatten the 
       forwarding structure (i.e., remove this construct to leave multiple 
       voice contents or even concatenate the voice contents to fit in a 
       recipient's mailbox), if necessary.  

     4.4.3 Audio/32KADPCM 

       SEND RULES 

       An implementation conforming to this profile MUST send Audio/32KADPCM by 
       default for voice [ADPCM]. This encoding is a moderately-compressed 
       encoding with a data rate of 32 kbits/second using moderate processing 
       resources. Typically, this body contains several minutes of message 
       content;  however, if used for spoken name or subject the content is 
       expected to be considerably shorter (i.e. about 5 and 10 seconds 
       respectively). 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Receivers MUST be able to accept and decode Audio/32KADPCM. If an 
       implementation can only handle one voice body, then multiple voice 
       bodies (if present) SHOULD be concatenated, and MUST NOT be discarded.  
       If concatenated, the contents SHOULD be in the same order they appeared 
       in the multipart.  

     4.4.4 Image/TIFF 

       A common image encoding for facsimile, known as TIFF-F, is a derivative 
       of the Tag Image File Format (TIFF) and is described in several 
       documents.  For the purposes of VPIM, the F Profile of TIFF for 
       Facsimile (TIFF-F) is defined in [TIFF-F], and the Image/TIFF MIME 
       content-type is defined in [TIFFREG].  While there are several formats 
       of TIFF, only TIFF-F is profiled for use within Multipart/Voice-Message.  
       Further, since the TIFF-F file format is used in a store-and-forward 
       mode with VPIM, the image MUST be encoded so that there is only one 
       image strip per facsimile page. 

       SEND RULES  

        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 23] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       All VPIM implementations that support facsimile MUST generate TIFF-F 
       compatible facsimile contents in the Image/TIFF subtype using the 
       application=faxbw encoding by default.  If the VPIM message is a voice-
       annotated fax, the implementation SHOULD send this fax content in 
       Multipart/Voice-Message.  If the message is a simple fax, an 
       implementation MAY send it without using the Multipart/Voice-Message to 
       be more compatible with fax-only (RFC 2305) implementations. 

       While any valid MIME body header MAY be used (e.g., Content-Disposition 
       to indicate the filename), none are specified to have special semantics 
       for VPIM and MAY be ignored.  Note that the content-type parameter 
       application=faxbw MUST be included in outbound messages.  

       RECEIVE RULES  

       Not all VPIM systems support fax, but all SHOULD accept it within the 
       multipart/voice-message. Within a Multipart/Voice-Message, a receiving 
       system that cannot render fax content SHOULD accept the voice content of 
       a VPIM message and discard the fax content. Outside a Multipart/Voice-
       Message, a recipient system MAY reject (with appropriate NDN) the entire 
       message if it cannot store or is not capable of rendering a message with 
       fax attachments.   VPIM conforming systems MAY support fax outside of 
       (or without) the Multipart/Voice-Message. 

       Some deployed implementations based on a common interpretation of the 
       original VPIM V2 specification reject messages with fax content within 
       the Multipart/Voice-Message rather than discard the unsupported 
       contents. These systems will return the message to the sender with an 
       NDN indicating lack of support for fax.  






















        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 24] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.5 Other MIME Contents 

       The following MIME contents (with the exception of multipart/mixed in 
       section 4.5.1) MAY be included within a multipart/voice message.  Other 
       contents MUST NOT be included.  Their handling is a local implementation 
       issue. Multipart/mixed is included to promote interoperability with a 
       wider range of systems and also to allow the creation of more complex 
       multimedia messages (with a VPIM message as one part).  

        

     4.5.1 Multipart/Mixed 

       This common MIME content-type allows the enclosing of several body parts 
       in a single message.  

       SEND RULES 

       A VPIM voice message (i.e., multipart/voice-message) MAY be included 
       within a message with a Multipart/Mixed top-level content type. 
       Typically, this would only be used when mixing non-voice and non-fax 
       contents with a voice message.  

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Such a message is not itself a VPIM message and the handling of such a 
       construct is outside the scope of the VPIM profile.  However, an the 
       spirit of liberal acceptance, a conforming implementation MUST accept 
       and render a VPIM voice message contained in a Multipart/Mixed. 

     4.5.2 Text/Directory 

       SEND RULES 

       This content was profiled in the original specification of VPIM v2 as a 
       means of transporting contact information from the sender to the 
       recipient.  This usage did not find widespread adoption and is no longer 
       a feature of VPIM V2.  Conforming implementations SHOULD NOT send the 
       Text/Directory content type. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       For compatibility with an earlier specification of VPIM v2, the 
       Text/Directory content type MUST be accepted by a conforming 
       implementation, but need not be stored, processed, or rendered to the 
       recipient. 





        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 25] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.5.3 Proprietary Voice or Fax Formats 

       Use of any other encoding except the required codecs reduces 
       interoperability in the absence of explicit knowledge about the 
       capabilities of the recipient. A conforming implementation SHOULD NOT 
       use any other encoding unless a unique identifier is registered with the 
       IANA prior to use (see [MIME4]).  The voice encodings SHOULD be 
       registered as subtypes of Audio. The fax encodings SHOULD be registered 
       as subtypes of Image. 

       SEND RULES 

       Proprietary voice encoding formats or other standard formats SHOULD NOT 
       be sent under this profile unless the sender has a reasonable 
       expectation that the recipient will accept the encoding.  In practice, 
       this requires explicit per-destination configuration information 
       maintained either in a directory, personal address book, or gateway 
       configuration tables. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       Systems MAY accept other Audio/* or Image/* content types if they can 
       decode them. Systems which receive Audio/* or Image/* content types 
       which they are unable to deposit or unable to render MUST return the 
       message (and SHOULD include the original content) to the originator with 
       an NDN indicating media not supported. 

        

     4.5.4 Text/Plain 

       MIME requires support of the basic Text/Plain content type (with the US-
       ASCII character set).  This content type has limited applicability 
       within the voice-messaging environment.  However, because VPIM is a MIME 
       profile, MIME requirements SHOULD be met.  

       SEND RULES 

       Conforming VPIM implementations SHOULD NOT send the Text/Plain content-
       type.  Implementations MAY send the Text/Plain content-type outside the 
       Multipart/Voice-Message. 










        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 26] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       RECEIVE RULES  

       Within a Multipart/Voice-Message, the Text/Plain content-type MAY be 
       dropped from the message, if necessary, to deliver the audio/fax 
       components. The recipient SHOULD NOT reject the entire message if the 
       text component cannot be accepted or rendered. 

       Outside a Multipart/Voice-Message, conforming implementations MUST 
       accept Text/Plain;  however, specific handling is left as an 
       implementation decision. From [MIME2] 

       Some deployed implementations based on a common interpretation of the 
       original VPIM V2 specification reject messages with any text content 
       rather than discard the unsupported contents. These systems will return 
       the message to the sender with an NDN indicating lack of support for 
       text.  

     4.6 Delivery Status Notification (DSN) 

       A DSN is a notification of delivery (positive DSN), non-delivery 
       (negative DSN), or temporary delivery delay (delayed DSN).  The top-
       level content-type of a DSN is Multipart/Report, which is defined in 
       [REPORT].  The content-type which distinguishes DSN's from other types 
       of notifications is Message/Delivery-Status, which is defined in [DSN].   

       SEND RULES 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation MUST be able to send DSN's that conform 
       to [REPORT] and [DSN].  Unless requested otherwise, a non-delivery DSN 
       MUST be sent when any form of non-delivery of a message occurs. 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation SHOULD provide a spoken delivery status 
       in the "human-readable" body part of the DSN, but MAY provide a textual 
       status. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation MUST be able to receive DSN's that 
       conform to [REPORT] and [DSN]. 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation MUST be able to receive a DSN whose 
       "human-readable" body part contains a spoken delivery status phrase or a 
       textual description.  Though subsequent use of the phrase or text is a 
       local implementation issue, the intent of the DSN MUST be presented to 
       the end user.   






        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 27] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     4.7 Message Disposition Notification (MDN) 

       An MDN is a notification indicating what happens to a message after it 
       is deposited in the recipient's mailbox.  An MDN can be positive 
       (message was read/played/rendered/etc.) or negative (message was deleted 
       before recipient could see it, etc.). The top-level content-type of a 
       MDN is Multipart/Report, which is defined in [REPORT].  The content-type 
       which distinguishes MDN's from other types of notifications is 
       Message/Disposition-Notification, which is defined in [MDN].   

       SEND RULES 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation SHOULD support the ability to request 
       MDNs. This is done via the use of the "Disposition-Notification-To:" 
       header field as defined in [MDN]. 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation SHOULD support the ability to send MDNs, 
       but these MDNs MUST conform to [REPORT] and [MDN].   

       When sending an MDN, a VPIM-compliant implementation SHOULD provide a 
       spoken message disposition in the "human-readable" body part of the MDN, 
       but MAY provide a textual status. 

       RECEIVE RULES 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation SHOULD respond to an MDN request with an 
       MDN response. 

       A VPIM-compliant implementation MUST be able to receive MDNs that 
       conform to [REPORT] and [MDN], if it is capable of requesting MDNs.  If 
       a VPIM-compliant implementation is capable of receiving MDNs, it MUST be 
       able to receive a MDN whose "human-readable" body part contains a spoken 
       message disposition phrase or a textual disposition description.  Though 
       subsequent use of the phrase or text is a local implementation issue, 
       the intent of the MDN MUST be presented to the end user.    

     4.8 Forwarded Messages 

       VPIM v2 explicitly supports the forwarding of voice and fax content with 
       voice or fax annotation.  However, only the two constructs described 
       below are acceptable in a VPIM message.  Since only the first (i.e. 
       Message/RFC822) can be recognized as a forwarded message (or even 
       multiple forwarded messages), it is RECOMMENDED that this construct be 
       used whenever possible. 







        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 28] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       Forwarded VPIM messages SHOULD be sent as a Multipart/Voice-Message with 
       the entire original message enclosed in a Message/RFC822 content-type 
       and the annotation as a separate Audio/* or Image/* body part.  If the 
       RFC822 header fields are not available for the forwarded content, 
       simulated header fields with available information SHOULD be constructed 
       to indicate the original sending timestamp, and the original sender as 
       indicated in the "From:" field.  Note that at least one of "From:", 
       "Subject:", or "Date:" MUST be present.  As well, the Message/RFC822 
       content MUST include at least the "MIME-Version:", and "Content-Type:" 
       header fields. From [MIME2] 

       In the event that forwarding information is lost, the entire audio 
       content MAY be sent as a single Audio/* segment without including any 
       forwarding semantics. An example of this loss is an AMIS message being 
       forwarded through an AMIS-to-VPIM gateway. 

     4.9 Reply Messages 

       VPIM v2 explicitly supports replying to received messages.  

       Support of multiple originator header fields in a reply message is often 
       not possible on voice messaging systems, so it may be necessary to 
       choose only one when gatewaying a VPIM message to another voice message 
       system.  However, implementers should note that this may make it 
       impossible to send DSN's, MDN's, and replies to their proper 
       destinations. 

       In some cases, replying to a message is not possible, such as with a 
       message created by telephone answering (i.e. classic voice mail).  In 
       this case, the From field SHOULD contain the special address non-mail-
       user@domain (see 4.1.2). The recipient's VPIM system SHOULD NOT offer 
       the option to reply to this kind of message (unless an outcalling 
       feature is offered -                          - which is out of scope for VPIM). 


















        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 29] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     5. Message Transport Protocol  

       Messages are transported between voice mail machines using the Internet 
       Extended Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (ESMTP).  All information 
       required for proper delivery of the message is included in the ESMTP 
       dialog.  This information, including the sender and recipient addresses, 
       is commonly referred to as the message "envelope".  This information is 
       equivalent to the message control block in many analog voice messaging 
       protocols. 

       ESMTP is a general-purpose messaging protocol, designed both to send 
       mail and to allow terminal console messaging.  Simple Mail Transport 
       Protocol (SMTP) was originally created for the exchange of US-ASCII 7-
       bit text messages.  Binary and 8-bit text messages have traditionally 
       been transported by encoding the messages into a 7-bit text-like form.  
       [ESMTP] formalized an extension mechanism for SMTP, and subsequent RFCs 
       have defined 8-bit text networking, command streaming, binary 
       networking, and extensions to permit the declaration of message size for 
       the efficient transmission of large messages such as multi-minute voice 
       mail. 

       The following sections list ESMTP commands, keywords, and parameters 
       that are required and those that are optional for conformance to this 
       profile. 

     5.1 Base SMTP Protocol 

       A conforming system MUST implement all mandatory SMTP and ESMTP 
       commands. Any defined optional command or parameter MAY be supported. 

     5.2 SMTP Service Extensions 

       VPIM utilizes a number of SMTP Service Extensions to provide full-
       featured voice messaging service.  The following extensions are profiled 
       for use with VPIM: 

     5.2.1 DSN Extension 

       The DSN extension defines a mechanism which allows an SMTP client to 
       specify (a) DSN's should be generated under certain conditions, (b) 
       whether such DSN's should return the contents of the message, and (c) 
       additional information, to be returned with a DSN, that allows the 
       sender to identify both the recipient(s) for which the DSN was issued, 
       and the transaction in which the original message was sent.   

       The DSN extension MUST be supported by VPIM conforming implementations. 

       In addition, beyond the requirements of [DRPT], conforming 
       implementations MUST support NOTIFY parameter on the RCPT command to 
       allow indication of when the originator requests a notification.  The 

        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 30] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       RET parameter SHOULD be supported to return the original message with 
       the notification.  Parameters ORCPT and ENVID MAY also be supported. 

       From [DRPT] 

     5.2.2 SIZE Extension 

       The SIZE extension defines a mechanism whereby an SMTP client and server 
       may interact to give the server an opportunity to decline to accept a 
       message (perhaps temporarily) based on the client's estimate of the 
       message size.  From [SIZE] 

       The SIZE extension MUST be supported by VPIM-compliant implementations. 

     5.2.3 ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES Extension 

       The ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES extension defines a mechanism whereby an SMTP 
       server augments its responses with the enhanced mail system status codes 
       defined in [CODES].  These codes can then be used to provide more 
       informative explanations of error conditions.  From [STATUS] 

       The ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES extension SHOULD be supported by VPIM-compliant 
       implementations. 

     5.2.4 PIPELINING Extension 

       The PIPELINING extension defines a mechanism whereby an SMTP server can 
       indicate the extent of its ability to accept multiple commands in a 
       single TCP send operation. Using a single TCP send operation for 
       multiple commands can improve SMTP performance significantly.  From 
       [PIPE] 

       The PIPELINING extension SHOULD be supported by VPIM-compliant 
       implementations. 

     5.2.5 CHUNKING Extension 

       The CHUNKING extension defines a mechanism that enables an SMTP client 
       and server to negotiate the use of the message data transfer command 
       "BDAT" (in alternative to the DATA command) for efficiently sending 
       large MIME messages. 

       From [BINARY] 

       The CHUNKING extension MAY be supported by VPIM-compliant 
       implementations. 





        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 31] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     5.2.6 BINARYMIME Extension 

       The BINARYMIME extension defines a mechanism that enables an SMTP client 
       and server to negotiate the transfer of unencoded binary message data 
       utilizing the BDAT command. 

       From [BINARY] 

       The BINARYMIME extension MAY be supported by VPIM-compliant 
       implementations.  Note that [BINARY] specifies that if BINARYMIME is to 
       be supported, then CHUNKING has to be supported by definition. 

     5.3 ESMTP - SMTP Downgrading 

       The SMTP extensions suggested or required for conformance to VPIM fall 
       into two categories.  The first category includes features that increase 
       the efficiency of the transport system such as SIZE, BINARYMIME, and 
       PIPELINING.  In the event of a downgrade to a less-functional transport 
       system, these features can be dropped with no functional change to the 
       sender or recipient.   

       The second category of features is transport extensions in support of 
       new functions.  DSN and ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES provide essential 
       improvements in the handling of delivery status notifications to bring 
       email to the level of reliability expected of Voice Mail.  To ensure a 
       consistent level of service across an intranet or the global Internet, 
       it is essential that VPIM-conforming ESMTP support the DSN extension at 
       all hops between a VPIM originating system and the recipient system. In 
       the situation where a "downgrade" is unavoidable a relay hop may be 
       forced (by the next hop) to forward a VPIM message without the ESMTP 
       request for delivery status notification.  It is RECOMMENDED that the 
       downgrading system should continue to attempt to deliver the message, 
       but MUST send an appropriate delivery status notification to the 
       originator, e.g. the message left an ESMTP host and was sent relayed to 
       a non-DSN-aware destination, and this may be the last DSN received. 
















        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 32] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     6. Directory Address Resolution 

       It is the responsibility of a VPIM system to provide the fully-qualified 
       domain name (FQDN) of the recipient based on the address entered by the 
       user (if the entered address is not already a FQDN).  This would 
       typically be an issue on systems that offer only a telephone user 
       interface.  The mapping of the dialed target number to a routable FQDN 
       address, allowing delivery to the destination system, can be 
       accomplished through implementation-specific means.   

       To facilitate a local cache, an implementation may wish to populate 
       local directories with the first and last names, as well as the senders' 
       spoken name information extracted from received messages. Addresses or 
       names parsed from the header fields of VPIM messages MAY be used to 
       populate directories.   

     7. Management Protocols 

       The Internet protocols provide a mechanism for the management of 
       messaging systems, from the management of the physical network through 
       the management of the message queues.  SNMP SHOULD be supported on a 
       VPIM-conforming machine. 

     7.1 Network Management 

       The digital interface to the VM and the TCP/IP protocols MAY be managed.  
       MIB II MAY be implemented to provide basic statistics and reporting of 
       TCP and IP protocol performance. [MIB II] 























        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 33] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     8. Conformance Requirements 

       VPIM is a messaging application that will be supported in several 
       environments and be supported on differing devices.  These environments 
       include traditional voice processing systems, desktop voice messaging 
       systems, store-and-forward relays, and protocol translation gateways. 

       In order to accommodate all environments, this document defines two 
       areas of conformance: transport and content.  

       Transport-conformant systems will pass VPIM messages in a store-and-
       forward manner with assured delivery notifications and without the loss 
       of information.  It is expected that most store-and-forward Internet 
       mail-based messaging systems will be VPIM transport-conformant. 

       Content-conformant systems will generate and interpret VPIM messages.  
       Conformance in the generation of VPIM messages indicates that the 
       restrictions of this profile are honored.  Only contents specified in 
       this profile or extensions agreed to by bilateral agreement may be sent.  
       Conformance in the interpretation of VPIM messages indicates that all 
       VPIM content types and constructs can be received;  that all  mandatory 
       VPIM content types can be decoded and presented to the recipient in an 
       appropriate manner; and that any unrenderable contents result in the 
       appropriate notification. 

       A summary of the conformance requirements is contained in Appendix A. 

       VPIM end systems are expected to be both transport- and content-
       conformant.  Voice messaging systems and protocol conversion gateways 
       are considered end systems. 

       Relay systems are expected to be transport-conformant in order to 
       receive and send conforming messages.  However, they must also create 
       VPIM-conforming delivery status notifications in the event of delivery 
       problems. 

       Desktop Email clients that support VPIM are expected to be content-
       conformant. Desktop email clients use various protocols and API's for 
       exchanging messages with the local message store and message transport 
       system.  While these clients may benefit from VPIM transport 
       capabilities, specific client-server requirements are out-of-scope for 
       this document.   









        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 34] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     9. Security Considerations 

     9.1 General Directive 

       This document is a profile of existing Internet mail protocols.  To 
       maintain interoperability with Internet mail, any security to be 
       provided should be part of the Internet security infrastructure, rather 
       than a new mechanism or some other mechanism outside of the Internet 
       infrastructure. 

     9.2 Threats and Problems 

       Both Internet mail and voice messaging have their own set of threats and 
       countermeasures.  As such, this specification does not create any 
       security issues not already existing in the profiled Internet mail and 
       voice mail protocols themselves.  This section attends only to the set 
       of additional threats that ensue from integrating the two services.  

     9.2.1 Spoofed sender 

       The actual sender of the voice message might not be the same as that 
       specified in the "Sender:" or "From:" message header fields or the MAIL 
       FROM address from the SMTP envelope.  In a tightly constrained 
       environment, sufficient physical and software controls may be able to 
       ensure prevention of this problem.  In addition, the recognition of the 
       sender's voice may provide confidence of the sender's identity 
       irrespective of that specified in "Sender:" or "From:".  It should be 
       recognized that SMTP implementations do not provide inherent 
       authentication of the senders of messages, nor are sites under 
       obligation to provide such authentication. 

     9.2.2 Unsolicited voice mail 

       Assigning an Internet mail address to a voice mailbox opens the 
       possibility of receiving unsolicited messages (either text or voice 
       mail).  Traditionally, voice mail systems operated in closed 
       environments and were not susceptible to unknown senders.  Voice mail 
       users have a higher expectation of mailbox privacy and may consider such 
       messages as a security breach.  Many Internet mail systems are choosing 
       to block all messages from unknown sources in an attempt to curb this 
       problem. 

     9.2.3 Message disclosure 

       Users of voice messaging systems have an expectation of a level of 
       message privacy that is higher than the level provided by Internet mail 
       without security enhancements.  This expectation of privacy by users 
       SHOULD be preserved as much as possible. 



        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 35] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     9.3 Security Techniques 

       Sufficient physical and software control may be acceptable in 
       constrained environments.  Further, the profile specified in this 
       document does not in any way preclude the use of any Internet object or 
       channel security protocol to encrypt, authenticate, or non-repudiate the 
       messages. 












































        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 36] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

        

     10. References 

     [8BIT] Klensin, J., Freed, N., Rose, M., Stefferud, E., D. Crocker, "SMTP 
        Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransport" RFC 1652, United Nations 
        University, Innosoft International, Inc., Dover Beach Consulting, Inc., 
        Network Management Associates, Inc., The Branch Office, July 1994. 

     [ADPCM] G. Vaudreuil and G. Parsons, "Toll Quality Voice - 32 kbit/s ADPCM:  
        MIME Sub-type Registration", RFC 2422, September 1998.  Revised by:  
        <draft-ietf-vpim-vpimv2r2-32k-03.txt>, February 2002. 

     [AMIS-A] Audio Messaging Interchange Specifications (AMIS) - Analog 
          Protocol Version 1, Issue 2, February 1992. 

     [AMIS-D] Audio Messaging Interchange Specifications (AMIS) - Digital 
        Protocol Version 1, Issue 3, August 1993. 

     [BINARY] Vaudreuil, G., "SMTP Service Extensions for Transmission of Large 
        and Binary MIME Messages", RFC 3030, December 2000. 

     [CODES] Vaudreuil, G. "Enhanced Mail System Status Codes", RFC 1893, 
        January 1996. 

     [MIMEDIR] F. Dawson, T. Howes, & M. Smith, "A MIME Content-Type for 
        Directory Information", RFC 2425 September 1998 

     [DISP] R. Troost and S. Dorner, Communicating Presentation Information in 
        Internet Messages:  The Content-Disposition Header, RFC 2183, August 
        1997. 

     [DNS1] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and specification", 
        RFC1035, Nov 1987. 

     [DNS2] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", RFC 1034, 
        Nov 1987. 

     [DRPT] Moore, K. "SMTP Service Extensions for Delivery Status 
        Notifications", RFC 1891, replaced by <draft-moore-rfc1891bis-00.txt>, 
        Work-in-Progress 

     [DSN] Moore, K., Vaudreuil, G., "An Extensible Message Format for Delivery 
        Status Notifications", RFC 1894, replaced by <draft-vaudreuil-1894bis-
        00>, January 1996. 

     [DUR] G. Parsons and G. Vaudreuil, "Content Duration MIME Header 
        Definition", RFC 2424, September 1998. Revised by:  <draft-ietf-vpim-
        vpimv2r2-dur-03.txt>, February 2002. 


        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 37] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     [E164] CCITT Recommendation E.164 (1991), Telephone Network and ISDN 
        Operation, Numbering, Routing and  Mobile Service - Numbering Plan for 
        the ISDN Era.   

     [ESMTP] Klensin, J., Freed, N., Rose, M., Stefferud, E., and D. Crocker, 
        "SMTP Service Extensions" RFC 1869, United Nations University, Innosoft 
        International, Inc., Dover Beach Consulting, Inc., Network Management 
        Associates, Inc., The Branch Office, November 1995. 

     [G726] CCITT Recommendation G.726 (1990), General Aspects of Digital 
        Transmission Systems, Terminal Equipment - 40, 32, 24,16 kbit/s 
        Adaptive Differential Pulse Code Modulation (ADPCM).   

     [HOSTREQ] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and 
        Support", STD 3, RFC 1123, October 1989. 

     [LANG] Alvestrand,H., "Tags for the Identification of Languages", RFC 3066, 
        January 2001. 

     [MDN] RFC 1891 updated by Vaudreuil, G, and Hansen, T, "An Extensible 
        Message Format for Message Disposition Notifications", <draft-
        vaudreuil-mdnbis-03.txt> Work-in-progress. 

     [MIB II] M. Rose, "Management Information Base for Network Management of 
        TCP/IP-based internets:  MIB-II", RFC 1213, March 1991. 

     [MIME1] N. Freed and N. Borenstein,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions 
        (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies", RFC 2045, 
        Innosoft, First Virtual, November 1996. 

     [MIME2] N. Freed and N. Borenstein,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions 
        (MIME) Part Two: Media Types ", RFC 2046, Innosoft, First Virtual, 
        November 1996. 

     [MIME3] K. Moore,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part 
        Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text ", RFC 2047, 
        University of Tennessee, November 1996. 

     [MIME4] N. Freed, J. Klensin and J. Postel,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail 
        Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", RFC 2048, 
        Innosoft, MCI, ISI, November 1996. 

     [MIME5] N. Freed and N. Borenstein,  "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions 
        (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples ", RFC 2049, 
        Innosoft, First Virtual, November 1996. 

     [PIPE] Freed, N., Cargille, A., "SMTP Service Extension for Command 
        Pipelining" RFC 2920, September 2000. 



        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 38] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     [REPORT] Vaudreuil, G., "The Multipart/Report Content Type for the 
        Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages", RFC 1892, replaced 
        by <draft-vaudreuil-rfc1892bis-00.txt> work-in-progress. 

     [REQ] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 
        Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. 

     [RFC822] Crocker, D., "Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text 
        Messages", STD 11, RFC 822, UDEL, August 1982. 

     [SIZE] Klensin, J, Freed, N., Moore, K, "SMTP Service Extensions for 
        Message Size Declaration" RFC 1870, United Nations University, Innosoft 
        International, Inc., November 1995. 

     [SMTP] Postel, J., "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", STD 10, RFC 821, 
        USC/Information Sciences Institute, August 1982. 

     [STATUS] Freed, N. "SMTP Service Extension for Returning Enhanced Error 
        Codes", RFC 2034, October 1996. 

     [TIFF-F] G. Parsons and J. Rafferty, "Tag Image File Format:  Application 
        F", RFC 2306, March 1998.  

     [TIFFREG] G. Parsons, J. Rafferty & S. Zilles, "Tag Image File Format:  
        image/tiff - MIME sub-type registraion", RFC 2302, March 1998. 

     [V-MSG] G. Vaudreuil and G. Parsons, "VPIM Voice Message MIME Sub-type 
        Registration", RFC 2423, September 1998.  

     [VCARD] Dawson, Frank, Howes, Tim, "vCard MIME Directory Profile" RFC 2426, 
        September 1998. 

     [VPIM1] Vaudreuil, Greg, "Voice Profile for Internet Mail", RFC 1911, Feb 
        1996. 

     [VPIM2] Vaudreuil, Greg, Parsons, Glenn, "Voice Profile for Internet Mail, 
        Version 2", RFC 2421, September 1998. 

     [X.400] CCITT/ISO, "CCITT Recommendations X.400/ ISO/IEC 10021-1, Message 
        Handling: System and Service Overview", December 1988. 











        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 39] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     11. Acknowledgments 

       The authors would like to offer a special thanks to the Electronic 
       Messaging Association (EMA), especially the members of the Voice 
       Messaging Committee, and the IETF VPIM Work Group, for their support of 
       the VPIM specification and the efforts they have made to ensure its 
       success. 

        

     12. Copyright Notice 

       "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. 

       This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 
       others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or 
       assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and 
       distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, 
       provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included 
       on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this  document itself 
       may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice 
       or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, 
       except as needed for the  purpose of developing Internet standards in 
       which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet 
       Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into 
       languages other than English.  

       The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 
       revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. 

       This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS 
       IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK 
       FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT 
       LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT 
       INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR 
       FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."  















        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 40] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

        

     13. Authors' Addresses 

       Glenn W. Parsons 
       Nortel Networks 
       P.O. Box 3511, Station C 
       Ottawa, ON  K1Y 4H7 
       Canada 

       Phone: +1-613-763-7582  
       Fax: +1-613-763-2697 
       Email: GParsons@NortelNetworks.com  
        

       Gregory M. Vaudreuil 
       Lucent Technologies 
       7291 Williamson Rd  
       Dallas, TX  75214 
       United States 

       Phone/Fax: +1-972-733-2722 
       Email: GregV@ieee.org 

        


























        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 41] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     14. Appendix A - VPIM Requirements Summary 

       The following table summarizes the profile of VPIM version 2 detailed in 
       this document.  Since in many cases it is not possible to simplify the 
       qualifications for supporting each feature this appendix is informative.  
       The reader is recommended to read the complete explanation of each 
       feature in the referenced section.  The text in the previous sections 
       shall be deemed authoritative if any item in this table is ambiguous. 

       The conformance table is separated into various columns: 

          Feature - name of protocol feature (note that the indenting 
                    indicates a hierarchy of conformance, i.e. the 
                    conformance of a lower feature is only relevant if there 
                    is conformance to the higher feature) 

          Section - reference section in main text of this document 

          Area - conformance area to which each feature applies: 
               C - content 
               T - transport 
           

          Status - whether the feature is mandatory, optional, or prohibited.  
          The key words used in this table are to be interpreted as described in 
          [REQ], though the following list gives a quick overview of the 
          different degrees of feature conformance: 
               Must         - mandatory 
               Should       - required in the absence of a compelling 
                              need to omit.  
               May          - optional 
               Should not   - prohibited in the absence of a compelling 
                              need. 
               Must not     - prohibited 

          Footnote - special comment about conformance for a particular feature 

        













        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 42] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

                              VPIM version 2 Conformance 
                                                             | | | | |S| | 
                                                  |          | | | | |H| |F 
                                                  |          | | | | |O|M|o 
                                                  |          | | |S| |U|U|o 
                                                  |          | | |H| |L|S|t 
                                                  |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n 
                                                  |          |R|U|U|M| | |o 
                                                  |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t 
                                                  |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t 
       FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e 
       -------------------------------------------|----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|- 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 
       Message Addressing Formats:                |          | | | | | | | 
         Use DNS host names                       |4.1       |C|x| | | | | 
         Use only numbers in mailbox IDs          |4.1.1     |C| |x| | | | 
         Numbers in mailbox IDs follow E.164      |4.1.1     |C| |x| | | | 
         Use alpha-numeric mailbox IDs            |4.1.1     |C| | |x| | | 
         Support of postmaster@domain             |4.1.2     |C|x| | | | | 
         Support of non-mail-user@domain          |4.1.2     |C| |x| | | | 
         Support of distribution lists            |4.1.3     |C| | |x| | | 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 
       Message Header Fields:                     |          | | | | | | | 
         Sending outbound messages                |          | | | | | | | 
           From                                   |4.2.1     |C|x| | | | | 
             Addition of text name                |4.2.1     |C| |x| | | | 
             Same value as MAIL FROM              |4.2.1     |C| |x| | | | 
           To                                     |4.2.2     |C| |x| | | |1 
           cc                                     |4.2.3     |C| | |x| | |1 
           Date                                   |4.2.4     |C|x| | | | | 
           Sender                                 |4.2.5     |C| | |x| | | 
           Return-Path                            |4.2.6     |C| | | | |x| 
           Message-ID                             |4.2.7     |C|x| | | | | 
           Reply-To                               |4.2.8     |C| | | |x| | 
           Received                               |4.2.9     |C|x| | | | | 
           MIME Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)          |4.2.10    |C| |x| | | | 
           Content-Type                           |4.2.11    |C|x| | | | | 
           Content-Transfer-Encoding              |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | | 
           Sensitivity                            |4.2.13    |C| | |x| | | 
           Importance                             |4.2.14    |C| | |x| | | 
           Subject                                |4.2.15    |C| |x| | | | 
           Disposition-notification-to            |4.7       |C| |x| | | | 
           Other Headers                          |4.2       |C| | |x| | | 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 







        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 43] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

                                                             | | | | |S| | 
                                                  |          | | | | |H| |F 
                                                  |          | | | | |O|M|o 
                                                  |          | | |S| |U|U|o 
                                                  |          | | |H| |L|S|t 
                                                  |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n 
                                                  |          |R|U|U|M| | |o 
                                                  |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t 
                                                  |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t 
       FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e 
       -------------------------------------------|----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|- 
         Receiving inbound messages               |          | | | | | | | 
           From                                   |4.2.1     |C|x| | | | | 
             Present text personal name           |4.2.1     |C| | |x| | | 
           To                                     |4.2.2     |C|x| | | | | 
           cc                                     |4.2.3     |C| | |x| | | 
           Date                                   |4.2.4     |C|x| | | | | 
             Conversion of Date to local time     |4.2.4     |C| |x| | | | 
           Sender                                 |4.2.5     |C| | |x| | | 
           Return-Path                            |4.2.6     |C| |x| | | | 
           Message-ID                             |4.2.7     |C| | |x| | | 
             MDN requested                        |4.2.7     |C|x| | | | | 
           Reply-To                               |4.2.8     |C| | |x| | | 
           Received                               |4.2.9     |C| | |x| | | 
           MIME Version: 1.0 (Voice 2.0)          |4.2.10    |C| |x| | | | 
           Content Type                           |4.2.11    |C|x| | | | | 
           Content-Transfer-Encoding              |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | | 
           Sensitivity                            |4.2.13    |C|x| | | | |2 
           Importance                             |4.2.14    |C| | |x| | | 
           Subject                                |4.2.15    |C| | |x| | | 
           Disposition-notification-to            |4.7       |C| |x| | | | 
           Other Headers                          |4.2       |C|x| | | | |3 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 
       Message Content Encoding:                  |          | | | | | | | 
         Sending outbound audio/fax contents      |          | | | | | | | 
           7BIT                                   |4.2.12    |C| | | | |x| 
           8BIT                                   |4.2.12    |C| | | | |x| 
           Quoted Printable                       |4.2.12    |C| | | | |x| 
           Base64                                 |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | |4 
           Binary                                 |4.2.12    |C| |x| | | |5 
         Receiving inbound message contents       |          | | | | | | | 
           7BIT                                   |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | | 
           8BIT                                   |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | | 
           Quoted Printable                       |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | | 
           Base64                                 |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | | 
           Binary                                 |4.2.12    |C|x| | | | |5 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 




        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 44] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

                                                             | | | | |S| | 
                                                  |          | | | | |H| |F 
                                                  |          | | | | |O|M|o 
                                                  |          | | |S| |U|U|o 
                                                  |          | | |H| |L|S|t 
                                                  |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n 
                                                  |          |R|U|U|M| | |o 
                                                  |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t 
                                                  |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t 
       FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e 
       -------------------------------------------|----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|- 
       Message Content Types:                     |          | | | | | | | 
         Sending outbound messages                |          | | | | | | | 
           Multipart/Voice-Message                |4.4.1     |C|x| | | | | 
             Message/RFC822                       |4.4.2     |C| |x| | | | 
             Audio/32KADPCM                       |4.4.3     |C|x| | | | | 
               Content-Description                |4.3.1     |C| | |x| | | 
               Content-Disposition                |4.3.2     |C|x| | | | | 
               Content-Duration                   |4.3.3     |C| | |x| | | 
               Content-Language                   |4.3.4     |C| | |x| | | 
             Image/TIFF; application=faxbw        |4.4.4     |C|x| | | | |7 
             Text/Directory                       |4.5.2     |C| | | |x| |9 
             Text/plain                           |4.5.4     |C| | | |x| | 
             Audio/* or Image/* (other encodings) |4.5.3     |C| | | |x| | 
             Other contents                       |4.5       |C| | | | |x| 
           Multipart/Mixed                        |4.5.1     |C| | |x| | | 
           Text/plain                             |4.5.4     |C| | |x| | | 
           Multipart/Report                       |4.6, 4.7  |C|x| | | | | 
              human-readable part is voice        |4.6, 4.7  |C| |x| | | | 
              human-readable part is text         |4.6, 4.7  |C| | |x| | | 
              Message/Delivery-Status             |4.6       |C|x| | | | | 
              Message/Disposition-Notification    |4.7       |C| |x| | | | 
           Other contents                         |4.5       |C| | | |x| |6 
        
         Receiving in inbound messages            |          | | | | | | | 
           Multipart/Voice-Message                |4.4.1     |C|x| | | | | 
             Message/RFC822                       |4.4.2     |C|x| | | | | 
             Audio/32KADPCM                       |4.4.3     |C|x| | | | | 
               Content-Description                |4.3.1     |C| | |x| | | 
               Content-Disposition                |4.3.2     |C| |x| | | | 
               Content-Duration                   |4.3.3     |C| | |x| | | 
               Content-Language                   |4.3.4     |C| | |x| | | 
             Image/TIFF; application=faxbw        |4.4.4     |C| |x| | | |8 
             Text/Directory                       |4.5.2     |C|x| | | | |9 
             Text/plain                           |4.5.4     |C| | |x| | | 
             Audio/* or Image/* (other encodings) |4.5.3     |C| | |x| | | 
             Other contents                       |4.5       |C| | |x| | | 
           Multipart/Mixed                        |4.5.1     |C| | |x| | | 



        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 45] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

                                                 |           | | | | |S| | 
                                                 |           | | | | |H| |F 
                                                 |           | | | | |O|M|o 
                                                 |           | | |S| |U|U|o 
                                                 |           | | |H| |L|S|t 
                                                 |           |A|M|O| |D|T|n 
                                                 |           |R|U|U|M| | |o 
                                                 |           |E|S|L|A|N|N|t 
                                                 |           |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t 
       FEATURE                                   |SECTION    | | | | |T|T|e 
       ------------------------------------------|-----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|- 
                                                 |           | | | | | | | 
          Text/plain                             |4.5.4      |C|x| | | | | 
          Multipart/Report                       |4.6, 4.7   |C|x| | | | | 
            human-readable part is voice         |4.6, 4.7   |C|x| | | | | 
            human-readable part is text          |4.6, 4.7   |C|x| | | | | 
            Message/Delivery-Status              |4.6        |C|x| | | | | 
            Message/Disposition-Notification     |4.7        |C| |x| | | | 
          Other contents                         |4.5        |C| | |x| | |6 
                                                 |           | | | | | | | 
         Forwarded Messages                      |           | | | | | | | 
           use Message/RFC822 construct          |4.8        |C| |x| | | | 
           simulate headers if none available    |4.8        |C| |x| | | | 
                                                 |           | | | | | | | 
         Reply Messages                          |4.9        |C|x| | | | | 
           send to Reply-To, else From address   |4.2.8      |C| | |x| | | 
           send to non-mail-user                 |4.9        |C| | | |x| | 
                                                 |           | | | | | | | 
         Notifications                           |           | | | | | | | 
           use Multipart/Report format           |4.6, 4.7   |C|x| | | | | 
           always send error on non-delivery     |4.6        |C|x| | | | | 
           send error messages to return-path    |4.2.6      |C|x| | | | | 
                                                 |           | | | | | | | 
       Message Transport Protocol:               |           | | | | | | | 
         Base ESMTP Commands                     |           | | | | | | | 
           HELO                                  |5.1        |T|x| | | | | 
           MAIL FROM                             |5.1        |T|x| | | | | 
           RCPT TO                               |5.1        |T|x| | | | | 
           DATA                                  |5.1        |T|x| | | | | 
           TURN                                  |5.1        |T| | | | |x| 
           QUIT                                  |5.1        |T|x| | | | | 
           RSET                                  |5.1        |T|x| | | | | 
           VRFY                                  |5.1        |T| | |x| | | 
           EHLO                                  |5.1        |T|x| | | | | 
           BDAT                                  |5.1        |T| | |x| | |5 






        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 46] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

                                                             | | | | |S| | 
                                                  |          | | | | |H| |F 
                                                  |          | | | | |O|M|o 
                                                  |          | | |S| |U|U|o 
                                                  |          | | |H| |L|S|t 
                                                  |          |A|M|O| |D|T|n 
                                                  |          |R|U|U|M| | |o 
                                                  |          |E|S|L|A|N|N|t 
                                                  |          |A|T|D|Y|O|O|t 
       FEATURE                                    |SECTION   | | | | |T|T|e 
       -------------------------------------------|----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|- 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 
         ESMTP Keywords & Parameters              |          | | | | | | | 
           DSN                                    |5.2.1     |T|x| | | | | 
             NOTIFY                               |5.2.1     |T|x| | | | | 
             RET                                  |5.2.1     |T| |x| | | | 
             ENVID                                |5.2.1     |T| | |x| | | 
             ORCPT                                |5.2.1     |T| | |x| | | 
           SIZE                                   |5.2.2     |T|x| | | | | 
           ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES                    |5.2.3     |T| |x| | | | 
           PIPELINING                             |5.2.4     |T| |x| | | | 
           CHUNKING                               |5.2.5     |T| | |x| | | 
           BINARYMIME                             |5.2.6     |T| | |x| | | 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 
         ESMTP-SMTP Downgrading                   |          | | | | | | | 
           send delivery report upon downgrade    |5.3       |T|x| | | | | 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 
       Directory Address Resolution               |          | | | | | | | 
         provide facility to resolve addresses    |6         |C| |x| | | | 
         use headers to populate local directory  |6         |C| | |x| | | 
                                                  |          | | | | | | | 
       Management Protocols:                      |          | | | | | | | 
         Network management                       |7.1       |T| | |x| | | 
       -------------------------------------------|----------|-|-|-|-|-|-|- 
        
       Footnotes: 
        
       1.  SHOULD leave blank if all recipients are not known or resolvable. 
       2.  If a sensitive message is received by a system that does not support 
           sensitivity, then it MUST be returned to the originator with an 
           appropriate error notification.  Also, a received sensitive message 
           MUST NOT be forwarded to anyone. 
       3.  If the additional header fields are not understood they MAY be 
           ignored 







        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 47] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       4.  When binary transport is not available 
       5.  When binary transport is available 
       6.  Other un-profiled contents MUST only be sent by bilateral agreement. 
       7.  If fax is supported. 
       8.  If the fax content cannot be presented it MAY be dropped.  
       9.  Handling of a vCard in text/directory is no longer defined. 
        












































        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 48] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     15. Appendix B - Example Voice Messages  

       The following message is a full-featured message addressed to two 
       recipients. The message includes the sender's spoken name, spoken 
       subject and a short speech segment.  The message is marked as important 
       and private. 

       To: +19725551212@vm1.mycompany.com 
       To: +16135551234@VM1.mycompany.com 
       From: "Parsons, Glenn" <12145551234@VM2.mycompany.com> 
       Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 10:20:20 -0700 (CDT) 
       MIME-Version: 1.0  (Voice 2.0) 
       Content-type: Multipart/Voice-Message; Version=2.0; 
         Boundary="MessageBoundary" 
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
       Message-ID: 123456789@VM2.mycompany.com 
       Sensitivity: Private 
       Importance: High 
        
       --MessageBoundary 
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name 
       Content-Language: en-US 
       Content-ID: part1@VM2-4321 
         
       glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd 
       (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data) 
       fgdhgddlkgpokpeowrit09== 

       --MessageBoundary 
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Spoken-Subject 
       Content-Language: en-US 
       Content-ID: part2@VM2-4321 
         
       glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd 
       (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Subject data) 
       fgdhgddlkgpokpeowrit09== 
        
        









        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 49] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       --MessageBoundary 
       Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
       Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
       Content-Description: Brand X Voice Message 
       Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message; filename=msg1.726 
       Content-Duration: 25  
        
       iIiIiIjMzN3czdze3s7d7fwfHhcvESJVe/4yEhLz8/FOQjVFRERCESL/zqrq 
       (This is a sample of the base64 message data) zb8tFdLTQt1PXj 
       u7wjOyRhws+krdns7Rju0t4tLF7cE0K0MxOTOnRW/Pn30c8uHi9== 
        
       --MessageBoundary-                         -                         -                         - 







































        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 50] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

       The following message is a forwarded single segment voice.  Both the 
       forwarded message and the forwarding message contain the senders spoken 
       names. 

          To: +12145551212@vm1.mycompany.com 
          From: "Vaudreuil, Greg" <+19725552345@VM2.mycompany.com> 
          Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 10:20:20 -0700 (CDT) 
          MIME-Version: 1.0  (Voice 2.0) 
          Content-type: Multipart/Voice-Message; Version=2.0; 
            Boundary="MessageBoundary" 
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
          Message-ID: ABCD-123456789@VM2.mycompany.com 
           
          --MessageBoundary 
          Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
          Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name 
          Content-Language: en-US 
          Content-ID: part3@VM2-4321 
           
          glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd 
          (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data)  
          fgdhgd dlkgpokpeowrit09== 
           
          --MessageBoundary 
          Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
          Content-Description: Forwarded Message Annotation 
          Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message  
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
           
          glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd 
          (This is the voiced introductory remarks encoded in base64) 
          jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gQ5tkjpokfgW 
          dlkgpokpeowrit09== 
           
           















        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 51] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

          --MessageBoundary 
          Content-type: Message/RFC822 
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
           
          To: +19725552345@VM2.mycompany.com 
          From: "Parsons, Glenn, W." <+16135551234@VM1.mycompany.com> 
          Date: Mon, 26 Aug 93 8:23:10 -0500 (EST) 
          Content-type: Multipart/Voice-Message; Version=2.0; 
            Boundary="MessageBoundary2" 
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 
          MIME-Version: 1.0  (Voice 2.0) 

          --MessageBoundary2 
          Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
          Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Originator-Spoken-Name  
          Content-Language: en-US 
          Content-ID: part6@VM2-4321 
           
          glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd 
          (This is a sample of the base-64 Spoken Name data) fgdhgd 
           dlkgpokpeowrit09== 
           
          --MessageBoundary2 
          Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
          Content-Disposition: inline; voice=Voice-Message  
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
           
          glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadasssdasddasdasd 
          (This is the original message audio data) fgwersdfmniwrjj 
          jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gQ5tkjpokfgW 
          dlkgpokpeowrit09== 
           
          --MessageBoundary2-- 
           
          --MessageBoundary--















        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 52] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

          The following example is for a DSN sent to the sender of a message by 
          a VPIM gateway at VM1.company.com for a mailbox which does not exist. 

          Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 17:16:05 -0400 
          From: Mail Delivery Subsystem <MAILER-DAEMON@vm.company.com> 
          Message-ID: <199407072116.RAA14128@vm1.company.com> 
          Subject: Returned voice message 
          To: 2175552345@VM2.mycompany.com 
          MIME-Version: 1.0  
          Content-Type: multipart/report; report-type=delivery-status; 
            boundary="RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM" 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM 
          Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
          Content-Description: Spoken Delivery Status Notification 
          Content-Disposition: inline; voice= Voice-Message-Notification 
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
           
          glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadadffsssddasdasd 
          (This is a voiced description of the error in base64)     
          jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gdffkjpokfgW 
          dlkgpokpeowrit09== 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM 
          Content-type: Message/Delivery-Status 
           
          Reporting-MTA: dns; vm1.company.com  
           
          Original-Recipient: rfc822; 2145551234@VM1.mycompany.com 
          Final-Recipient: rfc822; 2145551234@VM1.mycompany.com 
          Action: failed 
          Status: 5.1.1 (User does not exist) 
          Diagnostic-Code: smtp; 550 Mailbox not found  
          Last-Attempt-Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 17:15:49 -0400 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM 
          content-type: Message/RFC822 
           
          [original VPIM message goes here] 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/VM1.COMPANY.COM-- 
           









        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 53] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

          The following example is for an MDN sent to the original sender for a 
          message that has been played.  This delivered VPIM message was 
          received by a corporate gateway and relayed to a unified mailbox. 

          Date: Thu, 7 Jul 1994 17:16:05 -0400 
          From: "Greg Vaudreuil" <22722@vm.company.com> 
          Message-ID: <199407072116.RAA14128@exchange.company.com> 
          Subject: Voice message played 
          To: 2175552345@VM2.mycompany.com 
          MIME-Version: 1.0  
          Content-Type: multipart/report;  
            Report-type=disposition-notification; 
            Boundary="RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM" 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM 
          Content-type: Audio/32KADPCM 
          Content-Description: Spoken Disposition Notification 
          Content-Disposition: inline; voice= Voice-Message-Notification 
          Content-Transfer-Encoding: Base64 
           
          glslfdslsertiflkTfpgkTportrpkTpfgTpoiTpdadadffsssddasdasd 
          (Voiced description of the disposition action in base64)  
          jrgoij3o45itj09fiuvdkjgWlakgQ93ijkpokfpgokQ90gdffkjpokfgW 
          dlkgpokpeowrit09== 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM 
          Content-type: Message/Disposition-Notification 
           
          Reporting-UA: gregs-laptop.dallas.company.com (Unified FooMail 3.0) 
           
          Original-Recipient: rfc822;22722@vm.company.com 
          Final-Recipient: rfc822;Greg.Vaudreuil@foomail.company.com 
          Original-Message-ID: <199509192301.12345@vm2.mycompany.com> 
          Disposition: manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically; displayed 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM 
          Content-type: Message/RFC822 
           
          [original VPIM message goes here] 
           
          --RAA14128.773615765/EXCHANGE.COMPANY.COM-- 
           









        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 54] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     16. Appendix C - Example Error Voice Processing Error Codes 

       The following common voice processing errors and their corresponding 
       status codes are given as examples.  The text after the error codes is 
       intended only for reference to describe the error code.  Implementations 
       should provide implementation-specific informative comments after the 
       error code rather than the text below. 

           Error condition                 RFC 1893 Error codes 
           -----------------------------   -------------------------------- 

           Analog delivery failed          4.4.1 Persistent connection error 
           because remote system is busy         - busy 

           Analog delivery failed          4.4.1 Persistent protocol error 
           because remote system is              - no answer from host 
           ring-no-answer 

           Remote system did not answer    5.5.5 Permanent protocol error 
           AMIS-Analog handshake ("D" in         - wrong version 
           response to "C" at connect 
           time) 

           Mailbox does not exist          5.1.1 Permanent mailbox error 
                                                 - does not exist 

           Mailbox full or over quota      4.2.2 Persistent mailbox error 
                                                 - full 

           Disk full                       4.3.1 Persistent system error 
                                                 - full 

           Command out of sequence         5.5.1 Permanent protocol error 
                                                 - invalid command 

           Frame Error                     5.5.2 Permanent protocol error 
                                                 - syntax error 














        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 55] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

           Mailbox does not support FAX    5.6.1 Permanent media error 
                                                 - not supported 

           Mailbox does not support TEXT   5.6.1 Permanent media error 
                                                 - not supported 

           Sender is not authorized        5.7.1 Permanent security error 
                                                 - sender not authorized 

           Message marked private, but     5.3.3 Permanent system error 
           system is not private capable         - not feature capable 








































        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 56] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     17. Appendix D - Example Voice Processing Disposition Types 

       The following common voice processing disposition conditions and their 
       corresponding MDN Disposition (which contains the disposition mode, type 
       and modifier, if applicable) are given as examples. Implementers should 
       refer to [MDN] for a full description of the format of message 
       disposition notifications. 

       Notification event               MDN Disposition mode, type & modifier 
       ------------------------------   ------------------------------------ 

       Message played by recipient,    manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically;  
       receipt automatically returned  displayed 

       Message deleted from mailbox    manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically; 
       by user without listening       deleted 

       Message cleared when mailbox    manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically; 
       deleted by admin                deleted/mailbox-terminated 

       Message automatically deleted   automatic-action/ 
       when older than administrator   MDN-sent-automatically; deleted/ 
       set threshold                   expired 

       Message processed, however      manual-action/MDN-sent-automatically; 
       audio encoding unknown -        processed/error  
       unable to play to user          Error: unknown audio encoding 

       






















        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 57] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     18. Appendix E - IANA Registrations 

       There are no changes to the registration per [DISP] of the voice content 
       disposition parameter defined in the earlier VPIM V2 document, RFC 2421.  
       There are no changes to the registration per [MIME4] of the 
       Multipart/voice-message content type defines in the earlier VPIM v2 
       document, RFC 2423. 

       Both are presented here for information. 

     18.1 Voice Content-Disposition Parameter Definition 

       To: IANA@IANA.ORG 

       Subject: Registration of new Content-Disposition parameter 

        

       Content-Disposition parameter name: voice 

       Allowable values for this parameter: 

            Voice-Message - the primary voice message, 
            Voice-Message-Notification - a spoken delivery notification 
              or spoken disposition notification, 
            Originator-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the originator, 
            Recipient-Spoken-Name - the spoken name of the recipient if 
              available to the originator and present if there is ONLY one 
              recipient, 
            Spoken-Subject- the spoken subject of the message, typically 
              spoken by the originator 

       Description: 

       In order to distinguish between the various types of audio contents in a 
       VPIM voice message a new disposition parameter "voice" is defined with 
       the preceding values to be used as appropriate. Note that there SHOULD 
       only be one instance of each of these types of audio contents per 
       message level.  Additional instances of a given type (i.e., parameter 
       value) may occur within an attached forwarded voice message. 











        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 58] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     18.2 Multipart/Voice-Message MIME Media Type Definition 

        To: ietf-types@iana.org 
        Subject: Registration of MIME media type 
                 Multipart/voice-message 
         
        MIME media type name: multipart 
         
        MIME subtype name: voice-message 
         
        Required parameters: boundary, version 
         
           The use of boundary is defined in [MIME2] 
         
           The version parameter that contains the value "2.0" if 
           enclosed content conforms to [VPIM2R2].  The absence of this 
           parameter indicates conformance to the previous version 
           defined in RFC 1911 [VPIM1]. 
         
        Optional parameters: none 
         
        Encoding considerations: 7bit, 8bit or Binary 
         
        Security considerations: 
         
           This definition identifies the content as being a voice 
           message.  In some environments (though likely not the 
           majority), the loss of the anonymity of the content may be a 
           security issue. 
         
        Interoperability considerations: 
         
           Systems developed to conform with [VPIM1] may not conform to 
           this registration.  Specifically, the required version will 
           likely be absent, in this case the recipient system should 
           still be able to accept the message and will be able to 
           handle the content.  The VPIM v1 positional identification, 
           however, would likely be lost. 
         
        Published specification: 
           This document 
         
        Applications that use this media type: 
         
           Primarily voice messaging 
         





        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 59] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

        Additional information: 
         
           Magic number(s): none 
           File extension(s): .VPM 
           Macintosh File Type Code(s): VPIM 
         
        Person & email address to contact for further information: 
         
           Glenn W. Parsons 
           gparsons@nortelnetworks.com 
         
           Gregory M. Vaudreuil 
           gregv@ieee.org 
         
        Intended usage: COMMON 
         
        Author/Change controller: 
         
           Glenn W. Parsons & Gregory M. Vaudreuil 
           































        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 60] 
       Internet Draft               VPIM v2               February 14, 2002 
        

     19. Appendix F - Change History: RFC 2421 (VPIM V2) to this Document 

       The updated profile in this document is based on the implementation and 
       operational deployment experience of several vendors.  The changes are 
       categorized as general, content, transport and conformance.  They are 
       summarized below: 

       1. General 

          - Various and substantial editorial updates to improve readability. 

          - Separated send rules from receive rules to aid clarity. 

          - Clarified the behavior upon reception of unrecognized content           
          types expected with the interworking between voice and unified 
          messaging systems. (e.g. Unsupported non-audio contents should be 
          discarded to deliver the audio message.)  

          - Reworked the sensitivity requirements to align them with X.400.  
          Eliminated dependencies upon the MIXER documents. 

          - Reorganized the content-type descriptions for clarity 

       2. Content 

          - Changed handling of received lines by a gateway to SHOULD NOT delete 
          in a gateway.  In gateways to systems such as AMIS, it is not possible 
          to preserve this information.  It is intended that such systems be 
          able to claim conformance. 

          - Eliminated the vCard as a supported VPIM V2 content type. 

          - Merged in text from RFC 2423 (Multipart/voice-message) 

       3. Transport 

          - None 

       4. Conformance 

          - Aligned the table of Appendix A to the requirements in the text.  

      








        

       Vaudreuil & Parsons                               Expires August 14, 2002             [Page 61]