Subject: [Simple] MSRP: Miscellaneous REPORT issues

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 15:21:08 -0500

This note contains a few additional DSN issues, and the directions 
proposed by the design team.

1) We have had comments that the DSN file format may be two heavy weight.

We propose that DSN bodies become optional in REPORT methods. We would 
make it possible to convey basic information in header fields in the 
REPORT method. A DSN body would become optional for when the reporting 
device desires a more expressive approach, at its discretion.

We propose to add REPORT method header fields for MessageID and Status. 
The MessageID header would corelate with the MessageID of the original 
content. The status field will include a "scope" token, a status token, 
and a human readable string.

Actual DSN payloads are optional. Positive REPORTs MAY contain a 
payload. Negative reports SHOULD contain a DSN payload.

2) Handling REPORTs that occur after a session is complete. Relays are 
not aware of the precise timing of the opening and closing of a session, 
so they cannot be prevented from originating REPORTS for sessions that 
have been closed.

We propose to specify that a relay SHOULD NOT attempt to generate a 
report if it has reason to believe it will not be delivered. We do not 
define how it might have such reason, but will give a couple of examples 
(perhaps its URL has expired, or it has out-of-band knowledge.) 
Endpoints MAY accept REPORT requests after a session is over, but are 
not required to take any action to make it easy for someone to send one. 
Endpoints SHOULD NOT send DSN for expired sessions.

There was also a question about how to handle the situation where you 
have requested positive reports, but We do not state any normative 
requirements about waiting for REPORT requests to arrive before ending a 
session, but will discuss choices and their concequences.

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

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 10:34:06 +0300

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf
> Of ext Ben Campbell
> Sent: 28.June.2004 23:21
> To: Simple WG
> Cc: Cullen Jennings; Rohan Mahy; Adam Roach; Khartabil Hisham
> (Nokia-TP-MSW/Helsinki); Robert Sparks; Chris Boulton
> Subject: [Simple] MSRP: Miscellaneous REPORT issues
> 
> 

Just so people understand why TransactionID is not included, are DSN REPORTs scoped per message (i.e. all the chunks) for per transaction (chunck).

Thanks,
Hisham