RE: Authenticated subscription request

> It appears from the lack of responses to my original posting on this
> subject, that the current standard provides no common format for
> subscription requests, and therefore provides no means for
> authenticating subscription requests sent through IMPP compliant
> gateways.

CPIM explicitly did not take on defining a standard mechanism for
establishing trust between IMPP systems. That's not to say whether that
choice was correct or not, just pointing out that CPIM is pretty clear about
not even attempting to address this problem.

> Please help me define a common subscription request format that best
> captures the spirit of the IMPP community, and thus has the best
> prospect of being used by protocols likely to be transported by an
> IMPP compliant gateway.

The mailing list is not a very good way of designing something. It would be
more helpful if you could write up and submit a whole draft describing what
you want to accomplish and your proposed mechanism(s).  For questions like
the one you ask, you can provide both alternatives in the draft and make
clear that it still needs to be resolved. Then we'll all be in a better
position to both offer constructive criticism and judge how well such a
proposal does or doesn't mesh with what IMPP is supposed to accomplish.

Our de facto charter at this point is to finish CPIM, MSGFMT, and PIDF, so I
would generally prefer that we spend our energy and attention on getting
those documents finished.  We can certainly take on new drafts if they're
required to accomplish that task, but I'd be skeptical of plans to enlarge
the scope of IMPP at this point.

--Mark



  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]