Re: [Notifications] Notifications Types for Lemonade

Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> Wed, 03 January 2007 17:00 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H29Tz-0001os-4w; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:00:55 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H29Ty-0001oJ-JU for notifications@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:00:54 -0500
Received: from pythagoras.zen.co.uk ([212.23.3.140]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1H29Tx-0007sY-5E for notifications@ietf.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:00:54 -0500
Received: from [217.155.137.60] (helo=turner.dave.cridland.net) by pythagoras.zen.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H29Tr-0004PX-OH; Wed, 03 Jan 2007 17:00:47 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by turner.dave.cridland.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECCB7498003; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 17:00:50 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from turner.dave.cridland.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (turner.dave.cridland.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 23560-03; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 17:00:43 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from peirce.dave.cridland.net (unknown [IPv6:2001:4bd0:2029:0:2e0:81ff:fe29:d16a]) by turner.dave.cridland.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2264E498005; Wed, 3 Jan 2007 17:00:43 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 17:00:39 +0000
Subject: Re: [Notifications] Notifications Types for Lemonade
References: <C1B94D29.1D7E3%eburger@cantata.com> <p06240601c1c057fffdaf@[[192.168.1.13]]>
In-Reply-To: <p06240601c1c057fffdaf@[[192.168.1.13]]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <6991.1167843639.751581@peirce.dave.cridland.net>
From: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
To: Randall Gellens <randy@qualcomm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at dave.cridland.net
X-Originating-Pythagoras-IP: [217.155.137.60]
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 082a9cbf4d599f360ac7f815372a6a15
Cc: Message Notifications interest group discussion list <notifications@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: notifications@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Message Notifications interest group discussion list <notifications.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/notifications>, <mailto:notifications-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/notifications>
List-Post: <mailto:notifications@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:notifications-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/notifications>, <mailto:notifications-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: notifications-bounces@ietf.org

On Tue Jan  2 18:56:20 2007, Randall Gellens wrote:
>>  MWI (Message Waiting Indicator) - "You have 2 new messages, 1 fax 
>> message,
>>  and 99 old messages"
> 
> Is the purpose of this solely to enable a device to turn on or off 
> enunciators (e.g., voice mail or email icon on main phone screen)? 
> More specifically, is the intent that this is primarily intended as 
> input to a device's main UI, as opposed to a specific application 
> on a device (such as an email client)?
> 
> 
Good question - I've heard this discussed as part of the notification 
area of Lemonade, and I'd got it into my head that we were talking 
about a simple icon or blinking light - very much a boolean 
indicator, rather than a numeric display.


>>  OOB Sync Messages (Out-of-Band, i.e., not IMAP) - "Hey - wake up! 
>>  You have
>>  some work to do at the server."
> 
> Is the purpose of this intended to be limited to such wake-ups?  If 
> the intent is to exclude more detailed information (such as the 
> sender address, subject text, attachment and size information) then 
> we have a very simple protocol with limited security needs.  Such a 
> protocol can probably be mandatory to implement, but provides only 
> a subset of the desired cool capabilities.  (This is often a good 
> thing to start with.)
> 
> 
Well, I'd really seen this as a protocol to avoid synchronizing - 
what various people have described as "true push". A "sync needed" 
protocol is really a lot simpler, and simple STATUS message packaging 
probably do for that and the MWI scenario very nicely.

I'd also state for the record that I don't think we need more than a 
STATUS response, but pushing content and detailed state out of band 
has been a consistent feature of many proposals.


>>  User-Directed Alerts - "That important message from your boss 
>> just arrived."
> 
> The differences between each of the three categories involve the 
> level of detail supplied (and hence the security requirements), 
> complexity, and user control.

I'm not so sure. I think the first two can be seen as the limits on a 
spectrum of machine-readable notifications, whereas machine 
readability isn't nearly so important when considering a 
user-directed alert.

Luckily, I also happen to think that user-alerts are essentially 
taken care of by Sieve, on delivery.

Dave.
-- 
Dave Cridland - mailto:dave@cridland.net - xmpp:dwd@jabber.org
  - acap://acap.dave.cridland.net/byowner/user/dwd/bookmarks/
  - http://dave.cridland.net/
Infotrope Polymer - ACAP, IMAP, ESMTP, and Lemonade

_______________________________________________
Notifications mailing list
Notifications@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/notifications