One document matched: draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-03.txt
Differences from draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-02.txt
Internet Draft: Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail R. Gellens
Document: draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-03.txt Qualcomm
Expires: October 2005 April 2005
Mapping Between the Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS)
and Internet Mail
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed
and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance
with RFC 3668 (BCP 79).
By submitting this Internet-Draft, I accept the provisions of
Section 3 of RFC 3667 (BCP 78).
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 draft documents 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 "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of
Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
The cellular telephone industry has defined a service known as the
Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS). This service uses formats and
protocols which are similar to, but differ in key ways from those
used in Internet mail.
Gellens [Page 1] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
This document specifies how to exchange messages between these two
services, including mapping information elements as used in MMS
X-Mms-* headers as well as delivery and disposition reports, to and
from that used in ESMTP and Internet message headers.
Gellens [Page 2] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
Table of Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Conventions Used in this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.3 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.4 Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.5 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Mapping Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.1 MMS to Internet Mail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.2 Internet Mail to MMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.3 MMS Information Element Mappings . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.1.3.1 Table 1: MM3 Mappings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.1.3.2 Conversion of messages from MMS to Internet format 10
2.1.3.2.1 Table 2: Importance Mappings (MMS to Internet 14
2.1.3.2.2 Table 3: X-Priority Mappings (MMS to Internet 14
2.1.3.3 Conversion of messages from Internet to MMS format 17
2.1.3.3.1 Table 4: Priority Mappings (Internet Message t 18
2.1.4 Report Generation and Conversion . . . . . . . . . . 20
2.1.4.1 Delivery Report Mapping from MMS to Internet Messa 20
2.1.4.1.1 Table 5: Delivery Report Mappings (MMS to Inte 21
2.1.4.2 Delivery Report Mapping from Internet Message to M 22
2.1.4.2.1 Table 6: Delivery Report Mappings (Internet Me 23
2.1.4.3 Read Report Mapping from MMS to Internet Message . 24
2.1.4.3.1 Table 7: Read Report Mappings (MMS to Internet 25
2.1.4.4 Disposition Report Mapping from Internet Message t 26
2.1.4.4.1 Table 8: Disposition Report Mappings (Internet 26
2.1.5 Message Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Intellectual Property Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Disclaimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
1 Introduction
1.1 Scope
This document describes how to exchange messages with Internet mail
systems. This includes translation between MMS (as defined by
3GPP/3GPP2/OMA) and Internet Mail messages using Extended Simple
Mail Transfer Protocol [SMTP] and Internet message format [Msg-Fmt].
This also includes translation between delivery and disposition
reports as used in MMS and in Internet mail ([DSN-Msg] and [MDN]).
Gellens [Page 3] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
The MMS architecture [Stage_2] and specifications [Stage_3] refer to
interfaces as reference points named MMx. For example, MM1 is the
client-server interface, MM4 is the server-server interface, and MM3
is an interface to "external" or non-MMS systems. The specification
in this document can be used for message exchange between any system
which uses Internet Message formats and protocols and an MMS system;
from the perspective of the MMS system, reference point MM3 is used.
This document includes support for voice messages specified by the
Voice Profile for Internet Mail [VPIM]. The VPIM specification
allows voice messages to be exchanged between voice mail systems
using Internet mail format [Msg-Fmt] and transported via Extended
Simple Mail Transfer Protocol [SMTP]. Thus, the MMS MM3 interface
supports the ability to exchange voice messages between an MMS
system and a voice mail system. Note that such use is distinct from
voice media being part of a user-composed multimedia message.
Note that MM3 can also be used for interworking with "external"
(non-MMS) systems other than Internet mail, such as Short Messaging
Service (SMS) and access to external mail stores (such as a voice
mail system). This specification does not address these other uses
or sub-interfaces of MM3; it is only concerned with Internet mail
interworking and specifically exchange of messages.
All MM3 Stage 2 [Stage_2] functions are supported except for reply
charging and sender address hiding, which may be addressed in future
extensions.
1.2 Conventions Used in this Document
The key words "REQUIRED", "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD
NOT", and "MAY" in this document are to be interpreted as described
in "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"
[KEYWORDS].
Note that in the text of this document, a distinction is made
between use of "SMTP" or "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", and
"ESMTP" or "Extended Simple Mail Transfer Protocol": when the term
"ESMTP" or "Extended" is used, it indicates use of extended features
of SMTP; that is, those beyond the facilities of RFC 821. (These
extended facilities may be in RFC 2821 or in other RFCs, as
indicated by the specific RFC reference used; note that the name of
the RFC 2821 reference is "SMTP" because that is the official title
of the RFC.)
Gellens [Page 4] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
1.3 Definitions
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Anonymous Remailer |A service which accepts messages and resends
|them to their intended recipient, masking
|information about the original sender.
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Body |The portion of an SMTP message's Content
|following the Header (that is, following the
|first blank line). The Body may contain
|structured parts and sub-parts, each of which
|may have their own Header and Body. The Body
|contains information intended for the message
|recipient (human or software).
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Content |The portion of an SMTP message that is
|delivered. The Content consists of a Header
|and a Body.
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Disposition Report |Feedback information to an originator User
|Agent by a recipient User Agent about
Message Disposition |handling of an original message. This may
Notification |include notification that the message was or
|was not read, was deleted unread, etc.
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Envelope |The portion of an SMTP message not included in
|the Content; that is, not in the Header nor in
|the Body. Envelope information only exists
|while the message is in transit, and contains
|information used by SMTP agents (MTAs).
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Header |The first part of an SMTP message's Content.
|The Header is separated from the Body by a
|blank line. The Header consists of Fields
|(such as "To:"), also known as Header Fields
|or Headers. The message Header contains
|information used by User Agents.
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Gateway Function |An agent which acts as both MMSC and MTA
|and/or MSA.
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
User Agent |An MMS or Email user agent
--------------------|----------------------------------------------
Gellens [Page 5] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
1.4 Abbreviations
--------|----------------------------------------------------------
ESMTP |Extended Simple Mail Transfer Protocol. The use of
|features and capabilities added to SMTP since RFC 821.
--------|----------------------------------------------------------
MSA |Message Submission Agent. A server which accepts messages
|from User Agents and processes them; either delivering
|them locally or relaying to an MTA.
--------|----------------------------------------------------------
MTA |Mail Transfer Agent. A server which implements [SMTP].
--------|----------------------------------------------------------
1.5 Assumptions
It is assumed that the reader is already familiar with the contents
of the 3GPP2 MMS Specification Overview [Overview], MMS Stage 1
(requirements) [Stage_1] and Stage 2 (architecture and abstract
messages) [Stage_2], and 3GPP/3GPP2 Stage 3 (protocols) [Stage_3]
documents. It is also assumed that the reader is familiar with
Internet mail, especially RFC 2821 [SMTP] and RFC 2822 [Msg-Fmt].
2 Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail
This section defines the interworking between MMS Relay/Servers and
External Servers using native ESMTP. That is, information elements
are exchanged using standard Internet Message [Msg-Fmt] header
fields and standard [SMTP] elements.
SMTP and Internet mail extensions are used for features such as
delivery reports, message expiration, discovery of server support
for optional features, etc.
2.1 Mapping Specification
2.1.1 MMS to Internet Mail
When sending a message to an Internet mail system the MMS
Relay/Server MUST convert the MM if required, and MUST comply with
the requirements of [SMTP] (for example, use of a null return-path
for automatically-generated messages).
The MMS Relay/Server SHOULD use the information elements associated
with the MM to define the control information (Internet Message
header fields and ESMTP values) needed for the transfer protocol.
Gellens [Page 6] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
Section 2.1.3 lists the mappings between X-Mms-* headers and
Internet Message header fields and ESMTP values.
Delivery and read report MMs SHOULD be converted to standard
Internet Message report format (multipart/report). In addition to
converting Internet Message reports, the MMS Relay/Server MUST
generate delivery and read report MMs for received messages as
appropriate. See section 2.1.4 for more information.
2.1.2 Internet Mail to MMS
When receiving a message from an Internet mail system the MMS
Relay/Server MAY convert incoming messages to the MM format used
within the receiving system.
The MMS Relay/Server MAY convert control information received from
the Internet mail server into appropriate information elements of an
MM.
Section 2.1.3 lists the mappings between X-Mms-* headers and
Internet Message header fields and ESMTP values.
Standard Internet Message report format (multipart/report) messages
MAY be converted to delivery or read report MMs, as appropriate. In
addition to converting report MMs, the MMS Relay/Server MUST
generate standard Internet Message delivery and disposition reports
for received Internet messages as appropriate. See section 2.1.4
for more information.
Gellens [Page 7] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
2.1.3 MMS Information Element Mappings
The mappings between MMS elements and ESMTP/Internet Message
elements (either [SMTP] parameters, [Msg-Fmt] headers, or both) are
summarized in the table below, and detailed in subsequent sections.
The "MMS Headers" are from [OMA-MMS]. Note that only information
elements which need to be mapped are listed. [Msg-Fmt] headers not
listed here SHOULD be passed unaltered
2.1.3.1 Table 1: MM3 Mappings
=================|=================|================|==============
Information Elem |[SMTP] Element |[Msg-Fmt] Header|MMS Header
=================|=================|================|==============
3GPP MMS Version |N/A |N/A |X-Mms-Version:
| | |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Message Type |N/A |N/A |X-Mms-Message-
(of PDU) | | | Type:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Transaction ID |N/A |N/A |X-Mms-Transact
| | | ion-Id:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Message ID |ENVID [DSN-SMTP] |Message-ID: |X-Mms-Message-
| | | Id:
| | |Message-ID:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Recipient |RCPT TO |To:, Cc:, or |To:, Cc:, Bcc:
address(es) |address(es) |omitted (Bcc) |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Sender's address |MAIL FROM |From: (MAY set |From:
|address if |to locally-gen- |
|user-originated; |erated value |
|MUST set MAIL |to hide sender |
|FROM to null |identity) |
|("<>") for all | |
|automatically- | |
|generated MMs | |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Content type |N/A |Content-Type: |Content-type:
| | |
| |For voice mes- |
| |sages compliant |
| |to [VPIM], see |
| |Note 2 |
=================|=================|================|==============
Gellens [Page 8] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
=================|=================|================|==============
Information Elem |RFC 2821 Element |RFC 2822 Header |MMS Header
=================|=================|================|==============
Message class |Class=auto: |MAY set 'Prece |X-Mms-Message-
|MUST set MAIL | dence: bulk' | Class:
|FROM to null |on class=auto |
|("<>"). | |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Date and time |N/A |Date: |Date:
of submission | | |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Time of expiry |DELIVER-BY |N/A |X-Mms-Expiry:
|[Deliver-By] | |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Earliest deliv- |(only for submis-|N/A |X-Mms-Delivery
ery time |sion; not relay) | | -Time:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Delivery report |DSN [DSN-SMTP] |N/A |X-Mms-Delivery
request |SHOULD also | | -Report:
|specify recip- | |
|ient address as | |
|ORCPT; SHOULD | |
|also specify | |
|ENVID | |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Importance (a/k/a|N/A |Importance: |X-Mms-
"priority") | |X-Priority: | Priority:
| | |
| | |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Sender visib- |N/A |N/A |X-Mms-Sender-
ility | | | Visibility:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Read reply |N/A |Disposition- |X-Mms-Read-
request | | Notification | Reply:
| | -To: [MDN] |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Reply-charging |(not currently |(not currently |X-Mms-Reply-
permission |supported) |supported) | Charging:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Reply-charging |(not currently |(not currently |X-Mms-Reply-
permission |supported) |supported) | Charging-
deadline | | | Deadline:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Reply-charging |(not currently |(not currently |X-Mms-Reply-
permission |supported) |supported) | Charging-
limitation | | | Size:
=================|=================|================|==============
Gellens [Page 9] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
=================|=================|================|==============
Information Elem |RFC 2821 Element |RFC 2822 Header |MMS Header
=================|=================|================|==============
Reply-charging |(not currently |(not currently |X-Mms-Reply-
usage request |supported) |supported) | Charging-
| | | Id:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Reply-charging |(not currently |(not currently |X-Mms-Reply-
usage reference |supported) |supported) | Charging:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Subject |N/A |Subject: |Subject:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Forward counter |N/A |Resent-Count: |(Not sup-
| | |ported)
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Previously-sent- |N/A |Resent-From: |X-Mms-Previous
by | | | ly-Sent-By:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Previously-sent- |N/A |Resent-Date: |X-Mms-
date and-time | | | Previously-
| | | Sent-Date:
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Hop/host trace |N/A |Received: |(Not sup-
| | |ported)
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Sensitivity |N/A |Sensitivity: see|N/A
| |Note 1 |
_________________|_________________|________________|______________
Content |N/A |<message body> |<message body>
=================|=================|================|==============
Note 1: The [VPIM] 'Sensitivity' header element indicates the
privacy requested by the message originator (values are "personal"
or "private"); a message recipient MUST NOT forward a message with a
'Sensitivity' header.
Note 2: A MIME-Version header with a comment of "Voice 2.0"
indicates that the voice message conforms to [VPIM].
2.1.3.2 Conversion of messages from MMS to Internet format
3GPP MMS Version
The 'X-Mms-Version:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
Gellens [Page 10] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
Message Type (of PDU)
The 'X-Mms-Message-Type:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
Transaction ID
The 'X-Mms-Transaction-Id:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
Message ID
An 'X-Mms-Message-Id:' header, if present, SHOULD be retained.
The 'Message-Id:' header MUST be retained. If not present it MUST
be created, with a unique value. If an 'X-Mms-Message-Id:' header
is present and a 'Message-Id:' header is not, the value of the
'X-Mms-Message-Id:' header MAY be used in creating the 'Message-Id:'
header.
The message ID SHOULD be transmitted in the ESMTP envelope as the
ENVID parameter, as specified in [DSN-SMTP].
Recipient(s) address
The address of each recipient MUST be transmitted in the SMTP
envelope as a RCPT TO value. All disclosed recipients SHOULD also
appear in a 'To:' or 'Cc:' header. At least one 'To:' or 'Cc:'
header MUST be present. If all recipients are undisclosed, a 'To:'
header MAY be created that contains a comment, for example 'To:
(undisclosed recipients)'. The 'To:' header SHOULD NOT appear more
than once. The 'Cc:' header SHOULD NOT appear more than once.
Each recipient address MUST obey the length restrictions per [SMTP].
Current Internet message format requires that only 7-bit US-ASCII
characters be present in addresses. Other characters (for example,
non-7-bit characters in a phrase part of an address header) MUST be
encoded according to [Hdr-Enc]. Note that it would be possible to
define an SMTP extension to permit transmission of unencoded 8-bit
characters, but in the absence of such an extension [Hdr-Enc] MUST
be used.
Sender address
The address of the message sender SHOULD appear in the 'From:'
header, unless address hiding has been requested. If address hiding
has been requested, the 'From:' header MAY contain a comment to this
effect, for example, 'From: (anonymous sender)'.
Gellens [Page 11] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
The address of the message sender for all user-generated messages
('X-Mms-Message-Class: Personal') SHOULD be transmitted in the SMTP
envelope as the MAIL FROM value unless address hiding has been
requested and the receiving server is not known and trusted to
support address hiding.
The 'From:' header and the MAIL FROM value MAY be set to a
locally-generated value to hide the sender identity in anonymous
messages when the receiving system does not support anonymous
messages. Locally generated addresses MAY be internally mapped to
the actual address to allow replies to anonymous messages, but such
mapping is beyond the scope of this specification, as is a mechanism
for discovering and requesting support for anonymous messages.
Because of the risk of mail loops, it is critical that the MAIL FROM
be set to null ("<>") for all automatically-generated MMs (such as
'X-Mms-Message-Class: Auto'). The MAIL FROM value MUST be set to
null for all automatically-generated messages. This includes
reports, "out-of-office" replies, etc.
Current Internet message format requires that only 7-bit US-ASCII
characters be present in addresses. Other characters (for example,
non-7-bit characters in a phrase part of an address header) MUST be
encoded according to [Hdr-Enc]. Note that it would be possible to
define an SMTP extension to permit transmission of unencoded 8-bit
characters, but in the absence of such an extension [Hdr-Enc] MUST
be used.
The sender address MUST obey the length restrictions of [SMTP].
Content type
The 'Content-Type:' header SHOULD be preserved. Content types not
in widespread use in the Internet MAY be converted into those that
are, when such conversion can be done without significant loss of
content. For example, SMIL messages MAY be converted into
widely-supported multipart/related with multipart/html. When such
conversion is done, the 'Content-Type:' header MUST be updated if it
is no longer correct.
Message class
The 'X-Mms-Message-Class:' header MAY be retained. A 'Precedence:
bulk' header MAY be inserted for class=auto or class=advertisement.
See 'Sender Address' above. (Class=personal and class=informational
do not require special handling.)
Gellens [Page 12] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
Time of Expiry
The 'X-Mms-Expiry:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
The remaining time until the message is considered expired SHOULD be
transmitted in the ESMTP envelope by using the DELIVER-BY extension,
as specified in [Deliver-By].
Note that the ESMTP DELIVER-BY extension carries time remaining
until expiration; each server decrements the value by the amount of
time it has possessed the message. The 'X-Mms-Expiry:' header may
contain either the absolute time at which the message is considered
expired or the relative time until the message is considered
expired.
Earliest delivery time
The 'X-Mms-Delivery-Time:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
Future delivery is a message submission, not message relay feature.
Delivery report request
Requests for delivery status notifications (DSNs) SHOULD be
transmitted in the ESMTP envelope by using the DSN extension as
specified in [DSN-SMTP] to request "success" or "none" notification
(depending on the value of the 'X-Mms-Delivery-Report' header).
When the NOTIFY extension is used, the unaltered recipient address
SHOULD be transmitted as the ORCPT value, and the original message
ID SHOULD be transmitted as the ENVID value.
The 'X-Mms-Delivery-Report:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
Importance
The message sender's importance value (also called "priority",
although this can be confused with class-of-service values) SHOULD
be transmitted using an 'Importance:' header (although currently not
all Internet mail clients support this header).
An 'X-Priority:' header MAY be used in addition. Although not
standardized, most email applications support the 'X-Priority:'
header, and use an 'X-Priority' value of 3 for messages with
"normal" priority. More important messages have lower values and
less important message have higher values. In most cases, urgent
messages have an X-Priority value of 1.
Gellens [Page 13] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
Suggested mappings:
2.1.3.2.1 Table 2: Importance Mappings (MMS to Internet Message)
---------------------------|------------------
'X-Mms-Priority: High' |'Importance: High'
---------------------------|------------------
'X-Mms-Priority: Normal' |[omit]
---------------------------|------------------
'X-Mms-Priority: Low' |'Importance: Low'
---------------------------|------------------
Normal priority messages should omit the 'Importance:' header.
2.1.3.2.2 Table 3: X-Priority Mappings (MMS to Internet Message)
---------------------------|----------------------
'X-Mms-Priority: High' |'X-Priority: 2 (high)'
---------------------------|----------------------
'X-Mms-Priority: Normal |[omit]
---------------------------|----------------------
'X-Mms-Priority: Low |'X-Priority: 4 (low)'
---------------------------|----------------------
Normal priority messages SHOULD omit the 'X-Priority:' header.
The 'X-Mms-Priority:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
Sender visibility
Support for sender address hiding is not included in this version of
the mapping document.
The 'X-Mms-Sender-Visibility:' header, if present, SHOULD be
removed.
Read reply request
A request for a read reply SHOULD be transmitted using a
'Disposition-Notification-To:' header as specified in [MDN].
The 'X-Mms-Read-Reply:' header, if present, SHOULD be removed.
Reply-charging
Reply charging permission and acceptance are complex issues
requiring both user agent and server support. Misapplied reply
charging may cause incorrect billing. Until the security issues
have been properly addressed, reply charging SHOULD NOT be honored
Gellens [Page 14] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
when using this interface.
The 'X-Mms-Reply-Charging:', 'X-Mms-Reply-Charging-Deadline:',
'X-Mms-Reply-Charging-Size:', and 'X-Mms-Reply-Charging-Id:' headers
MAY be removed. Messages containing a reply-charging usage request
('X-Mms-Reply-Charging-Id:' and 'X-Mms-Reply-Charging: accepted' or
'X-Mms-Reply-Charging: accepted (text only)' headers) SHOULD be
rejected.
Subject
The 'Subject:' header MUST be preserved. Current Internet message
format requires that only 7-bit US-ASCII characters be present.
Other characters must be encoded according to [Hdr-Enc]. Note that
it would be possible to define an SMTP extension to permit
transmission of unencoded 8-bit characters, but in the absence of
such an extension [Hdr-Enc] must be used.
Resending/Forwarding
In MMS a message may be resent or forwarded, the difference being
that if the message has been downloaded then sending it to another
address is considered forwarding, while sending a message that has
not been downloaded is considered to be resending.
In Internet mail there are two primary ways of sending a previously
received message to a new recipient: forwarding and resending.
Forwarding is when a user creates a new message containing the
original message, either simply embedded within the text, or
delineated. Embedded messages generally have each original line
preceded by a quote symbol ('>'), surround the original text with a
preceding and trailing line which starts with hyphens as per
[Msg-Encap], such as '--- begin forwarded text' and '--- end
forwarded text', or encapsulate the original message as a
'message/rfc822' content type, perhaps within a 'multipart/mixed'
message. (This last method offers more robust delineation.)
Resending is when the original message is unaltered except for the
addition of 'Resent-' headers to explain the resending to the new
recipient.
A message may be resent more than once; each time new 'Resent-'
headers SHOULD be added at the top of the message. Thus, if more
than one series of 'Resent-' headers are present, the original
series is the last; the most recent is the first.
Forward counter
Gellens [Page 15] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
The 'Resent-Count:' header MAY be used to track the number of times
the message has been resent. Note that loop control is often done
by counting 'Received' headers, which are more general than
'Resent-' headers.
Previously-sent Information
A 'Resent-From:' header MAY be added to indicate the address of the
user who directed the message to be resent.
A 'Resent-Date:' header SHOULD be added to indicate the time and
date that the message was resent.
Any 'X-Mms-Previously-Sent-By:' and 'X-Mms-Previously-Sent-Date'
headers, if present, SHOULD be removed. The information contained
in them SHOULD be translated into 'From:', 'Resent-To:',
'Resent-From:', 'Resent-Date:', and 'Resent-Count:' headers. The
original sender of the message SHOULD appear in the 'From:' header;
the original recipient(s) SHOULD appear in the 'To:' header; the
time and date the message was originally sent SHOULD appear in the
'Date:' header. The most recent sender SHOULD appear in the
top-most 'Resent-From:' header; the most recent recipient(s) SHOULD
appear in the top-most 'Resent-To:' header; the time and date the
message was most recently sent SHOULD appear in the top-most
'Resent-Date:' header.
'Received:' Headers
Each system that processes a message SHOULD add a 'Received:' header
as per [SMTP]. A message MAY be rejected if the number of
'Received:' headers exceeds a locally-defined maximum, which MUST
conform to [SMTP] section 6.2 and SHOULD be no less than 100.
Privacy
Note that MMS systems do not currently support the 'Privacy' header
field as described by [VPIM].
Content
The message content appears in the message body. Note that Internet
message format requires that line-endings be encoded as CR LF, thus
charset encodings that do not have this property cannot be used in
text/* body parts. (They MAY be used in other body parts, but only
when they are suitable encoded or when binary transmission has been
negotiated.) In particular, MMS allows UTF-16, while Internet
message format does not. UTF-16 encoding MUST be translated to
UTF-8 or another charset and encoding which is suitable for use in
Internet message format/protocols.
Gellens [Page 16] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
2.1.3.3 Conversion of messages from Internet to MMS format
3GPP MMS Version
An 'X-Mms-Mms-Version:' header SHOULD be added.
Message Type (of PDU)
An 'X-Mms-Message-Type:' header SHOULD be used in accordance with
the specific MMS interface (e.g., MM1, MM4).
Transaction ID
An 'X-Mms-Transaction-Id:' header SHOULD be used in accordance with
the specific MMS interface (e.g., MM1, MM4).
Message ID
The 'Message-Id:' header MUST be retained. If not present it MUST
be created, with a unique value. If the 'Message-Id:' header does
not exist, but the SMTP envelop contains an ENVID value (as
specified in [DSN-SMTP]), it MAY be used to construct the value.
Recipient(s) address
'To:' and 'Cc:' headers MUST be retained.
Each recipient contained in the SMTP envelope (RCPT TO values) MUST
be considered a recipient of the message. Recipients who appear in
address headers but not the SMTP envelope MUST be ignored.
Recipients who appear in the [SMTP] envelope but do not appear in
headers are considered "blind" (Bcc) recipients; such recipients
MUST NOT be added to message headers (including address and trace
headers) unless there is only one recipient total.
Sender address
The 'From:' header MUST be retained.
Content type
The complete 'Content-Type:' header (including any parameters)
SHOULD be preserved.
Message class
Gellens [Page 17] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
An X-Mms-Message-Class: personal' header SHOULD be created for all
received messages with a non-null return path (MAIL FROM value in
the SMTP envelope). An X-Mms-Message-Class: auto' header MAY be
created for messages with a null return path.
Time of Expiry
An 'x-Mms-Expiry:' header SHOULD be created if the message contains
a relative time to expiration in the DELIVER-BY extension, as
specified in [Deliver-By].
Earliest delivery time
An 'X-Mms-Delivery-Time:' header SHOULD NOT be created. If a
message arrives via ESMTP relay containing an earliest time of
delivery in the AFTER extension, it MAY be rejected. If a message
is submitted via Message Submission [Submission] containing an
earliest time of delivery in the AFTER extension, it MUST either be
retained until the delivery time arrives, or it may be immediately
rejected. It MUST NOT be delivered or further relayed prior to the
delivery time.
Delivery report request
An 'X-Mms-Delivery-Report:' header SHOULD be created for messages
which request 'success' or 'none' delivery status notification by
use of the DSN extension as specified in [DSN-SMTP]. Requests for
'delay' notifications or non-default actions, such as that only the
message headers should be returned, cannot be mapped onto MMS
headers and thus SHOULD be ignored.
Priority
An 'X-Priority:' or 'Importance:' header, if present, SHOULD be
replaced with an 'X-Mms-Priority:' header. Suggested mappings:
2.1.3.3.1 Table 4: Priority Mappings (Internet Message to MMS)
-------------------------------|----------------------
'X-Priority: 1 (highest)' |'X-Mms-Priority: High'
-------------------------------|----------------------
'X-Priority: 2 (high)' |'X-Mms-Priority: High'
-------------------------------|----------------------
'Importance: High' |'X-Mms-Priority: High'
-------------------------------|----------------------
'X-Priority: 3 (normal)' | [omitted]
-------------------------------|----------------------
'Importance: Normal' | [omitted]
-------------------------------|----------------------
Gellens [Page 18] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
'X-Priority: 4 (low)' |'X-Mms-Priority: Low'
-------------------------------|----------------------
'Importance: Low' |'X-Mms-Priority: Low'
-------------------------------|----------------------
'X-Priority: 5 (lowest)' |'X-Mms-Priority: Low'
-------------------------------|----------------------
Normal priority messages SHOULD omit the 'X-Mms-Priority:' header.
Sender visibility
Support for sender address hiding is not currently supported.
Read reply request
A request for a read reply contained in a
'Disposition-Notification-To:' header as specified in [MDN] SHOULD
be replaced with an 'X-Mms-Read-Reply:' header.
Subject
The 'Subject:' header MUST be preserved.
Resending/Forwarding
One or more sets of 'Resent-' headers, if present, SHOULD be mapped
to 'To:', 'From:', 'Date:', and 'X-Mms-Previously-Sent-' headers.
'Received:' Headers
Each system that processes a message SHOULD add a 'Received:' header
as per [SMTP]. A message MAY be rejected if the number of
'Received:' headers exceeds a locally-defined maximum, which MUST
conform to [SMTP] section 6.2 and SHOULD be no less than 100.
Sensitivity
The 'Sensitivity:' header field (value = "personal" or "private")
[VPIM] indicates the desire of a voice message originator to send
the message contents to the original recipient list with assurance
that the message will not be forwarded further by either the
messaging system or the actual message recipient(s). Since
sensitivity is not an MMS feature, any messages which contain a
'Sensitivity:' header SHOULD NOT be sent to an MMS system. An
appropriate extended error response code [RESP] SHOULD be used in
the associated negative delivery status report.
Gellens [Page 19] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
Content
The message content appears in the message body.
2.1.4 Report Generation and Conversion
Internet Message systems use the multipart/report MIME type for
delivery and disposition reports (often called "read reports") as
specified in [Report-Fmt]. This format is a two- or three-part MIME
message; one part is a structured format describing the event being
reported in an easy-to-parse format. Specific reports have a format
which is built on [Report-Fmt]. Delivery reports are specified in
[DSN-Msg]. Message disposition reports, which include read reports,
are specified in [MDN].
By contrast, MMS reports are plain text, with no defined structure
specified. This makes it difficult to convert from an MMS report to
a standard Internet report.
An MMS Relay/Server supporting Internet Message exchange using MM3
MUST convert reports received from one side (MMS or Internet mail)
destined for the other. In addition, reports MUST be generated as
appropriate for messages received from either side of the MM3
interface. For example, if an MM to be sent via MM3 is not
deliverable, a delivery status MM shall be generated. Likewise, if
an Internet message is received via MM3 that cannot be further
relayed or delivered, a delivery status report [DSN-Msg] MUST be
generated.
When creating delivery or disposition reports from MMS reports, the
MMS report should be parsed to determine the reported event and
time, status, and the headers of the referenced (original) message.
These elements, once determined, are used to populate the subparts
of the delivery or disposition report. The first subpart is of type
text/plain, and contains a human-readable explanation of the event.
This text may include a statement that the report was synthesized
based on an MMS report. The second subpart is of type
report/delivery-status (for delivery reports) or
report/disposition-notification (for disposition reports). This
second part contains a structured itemization of the event. The
third subpart is of type message/rfc822 and includes the headers and
optionally the body of the referenced (original) message.
2.1.4.1 Delivery Report Mapping from MMS to Internet Message
Gellens [Page 20] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
The following table maps information elements from MMS delivery
reports to the format specified in [DSN-Msg].
2.1.4.1.1 Table 5: Delivery Report Mappings (MMS to Internet Message)
======================|============|===================================
Information Element |MMS Delivery|[DSN-Msg] Element
|Report Elem |
======================|============|===================================
ID of message whose |Message-Id: |'Original-Envelope-ID' field of
delivery status is | |per-message fields (use value of
being reported | |ENVID from ESMTP envelope if avail-
| |able, 'Message-ID:' otherwise).
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Recipient address of |From: |'Final-Recipient' field of the
the original message | |per-recipient section
(object of delivery | |
report) | |
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Destination address of|To: |'To:' header field value of top-
report | |level.
| |
| |Value taken from [SMTP] envelope
| |return-path of message being
| |reported, not its 'From:' header
| |field.
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Date and time the |Date: |'Date:' header field value of top-
message was handled | |level
======================|============|===================================
Gellens [Page 21] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
======================|============|===================================
Information Element |MMS Delivery|[DSN-Msg] Element
|Report Elem |
======================|============|===================================Delivery status of |X-Mms- |Action and Status fields of
original message | Status: |per-recipient section.
| |
| |The 'Action' field indicates if the
| |message was delivered.
| |
| |For failed delivery an appropriate
| |'Status' value shall be included
| |per [DSN-Msg].
| |
| |The Action field is set to one of
| |the following values:
| |
| |* delivered (used for MMS status
| |values 'retrieved' and 'rejected',
| |depending on 'Status' code).
| |
| |* failed (used for MMS status
| |values 'expired' and 'unreachable')
| |
| |* delayed MAY be used for MMS
| |status value 'deferred'
| |
| |* relayed (used for MMS status
| |value 'indeterminate')
| |
| |* expanded (SHOULD NOT be used)
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Status Text | |Text in first part (human-readable
| |part)
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
When an MMS Relay/Server generates a [DSN-Msg] in response to a
message received using [SMTP] on MM3:
* Top-level header field 'To:' SHOULD be the [SMTP] return-path of
the message whose status is being reported.
* Top-level header field 'From:' SHOULD be the address of the
recipient that the delivery-report concerns.
* The first part of the [DSN-Msg] SHOULD include the MM Status Text
field that would have been generated for an MM1 delivery-report.
Gellens [Page 22] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
2.1.4.2 Delivery Report Mapping from Internet Message to MMS
The following table maps information elements from a delivery report
as specified in [DSN-Msg] to the format of an MMS delivery report.
2.1.4.2.1 Table 6: Delivery Report Mappings (Internet Message to MMS)
===================|==================|================================
Information Element|MMS Delivery |[DSN=Msg] Element
|Report Element |
===================|==================|================================
ID of the original |Message-Id: |'Original-Envelope-ID' field of
message (object of | |per-message fields. If not
delivery report) | |available, the 'Message-ID'
| |header field of the message
| |being reported, if included in
| |the third part, may be
| |substituted.
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Recipient address |From: |If available, the 'Original
of the original | |-Recipient' field of the per-
message (object of | |recipient section should be
delivery report) | |used; otherwise the 'Final-
| |Recipient' field of the per-
| |recipient section is used
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Destination address|To: |'To:' header field value of
of report | |top-level.
| |
| |Value taken from [SMTP] envelope
| |return-path of message being
| |reported, not its 'From:' header
| |field.
===================|==================|===================================
Gellens [Page 23] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
===================|==================|================================
Information Element|MMS Delivery |[DSN=Msg] Element
|Report Element |
===================|==================|================================
Date and time the |Date: |'Date:' header field value of
message was handled| |top-level
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Delivery status of |X-Mms-Status: |'Action' and 'Status' fields of
original message | |per-recipient section
|Set to one of the |
|following values: |
| |
|'retrieved' (used |
|for 'Action' value|
|'delivered'). |
| |
|'unreachable' |
|(used for 'Action'|
|value 'failed') |
| |
|'forwarded' (used |
|for 'Action' value|
|'relayed') |
| |
|'deferred' MUST |
|NOT be used |
|(ignore DSNs with |
|'Action' value |
|'delayed') |
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Status Text | |Text in first part (human-
| |readable part)
===================|==================|================================
Gellens [Page 24] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
2.1.4.3 Read Report Mapping from MMS to Internet Message
The following table maps information elements from MMS read reports
to the format specified in [MDN].
2.1.4.3.1 Table 7: Read Report Mappings (MMS to Internet Message)
======================|============|===================================
Information Element |MMS Delivery|[DSN-Msg] Element
|Report Elem |
======================|============|===================================
ID of the original |Message-Id: |'Original-Envelope-ID' field (use
message (object of | |value of ENVID from ESMTP envelope
read report) | |if available, 'Message-ID:'
| |otherwise).
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Recipient address of |From: |'Final-Recipient' field
the original message | |
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Destination address of|To: |'To:' header field value of top-
report | |level.
| |
| |Value taken from 'Disposition-
| |Notification-To:' header field of
| |message being reported, not its
| |'From:' header field.
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Date and time the |Date: |'Date:' header field value of top-
message was handled | |level
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Disposition of message|X-Mms-Read- |Disposition-field
being reported | Status: |
| |For MMS-Read-Status value 'read',
| |use 'disposition-type' value
| |'displayed'; for MMS-Read-Status
| |value 'Deleted without being read',
| |use 'disposition-type' value
| |'deleted')
----------------------|------------|-----------------------------------
Status Text | |Text in first part (human-readable
| |part)
======================|============|===================================
When an MMS Relay/Server generates an [MDN] in response to a message
received using ESMTP on MM3:
Gellens [Page 25] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
* Top-level header field 'To:' SHOULD be the value of the
'Disposition-Notification-To:' header field of the message whose
disposition is being reported .
* Top-level header field 'From:' SHOULD be the address of the
recipient that the read report concerns.
2.1.4.4 Disposition Report Mapping from Internet Message to MMS
The following table maps information elements from a disposition
report as specified in [MDN] to the format of an MMS read report.
2.1.4.4.1 Table 8: Disposition Report Mappings (Internet Message to
MMS)
===================|==================|================================
Information Element|MMS Read Report |[DSN=Msg] Element
|Element |
===================|==================|================================
ID of the original |Message-Id: |'Original-Envelope-ID' field
message (object of | |
disposition report)| |
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Recipient address |From: |'Final-Recipient' field
of the original | |
message | |
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Destination address|To: |'To:' header field value of
of report | |top-level.
| |
| |Value taken from 'Disposition-
| |Notification-To:' header field
| |of message being reported, not
| |its 'From:' header field.
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Date and time the |Date: |'Date:' header field value of
message was handled| |top-level
===================|==================|================================
Gellens [Page 26] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
===================|==================|================================
Information Element|MMS Read Report |[DSN=Msg] Element
|Element |
===================|==================|================================Disposition of |X-Mms-Read-Status:|disposition-field
message being | |
reported |Set to one of the |
|following values: |
| |
|'read' (used for |
|disposition-type |
|value 'displayed')|
| |
|'Deleted without |
|being read' (used |
|for disposition- |
|types 'deleted', |
|'denied' and |
|'failed' when |
|action-mode is |
|'automatic- |
|action') |
-------------------|------------------|--------------------------------
Status Text | |Text in first part (human-
| |readable part)
===================|==================|================================
2.1.5 Message Delivery
Within Internet mail, when ESMTP is used and delivery reports are
requested [DSN-SMTP], delivery is considered to be acceptance of a
message by the final server, that is, the server closest to the
recipient. When an MMS Relay/Server receives a message using ESMTP
and a delivery report is requested, the MMS Relay/Server MAY
consider the message delivered when it has been sent to the MMS User
Agent.
3 Security Considerations
Data contained within messages should not be automatically trusted.
Even within a carrier's network, and certainly within the Internet,
various deliberate and accidental attacks or corruptions are
possible. For example, routers may contain vulnerabilities which
may be exploited, IP traffic may be intercepted and/or modified,
etc.
Gellens [Page 27] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
The following messaging-related security threats can be identified:
* Misidentification of message source.
* Message interception (unauthorized disclosure of contents).
* Unauthorized disclosure of message sender or recipient.
* Message modification (by adversary).
* Message replay.
* Traffic analysis (determining who is communicating with whom).
There are existing mechanisms which can be used to protect email
traffic against some of these threats, such as:
* Use of SSL/TLS (via [StartTLS]) to address disclosure and
modification in transit between adjacent servers.
* SMTP Authentication [Auth] to protect against misidentification of
message source.
* Use of end-to-end security mechanisms such as [PGP] or S/MIME
[SMIME] to protect message contents.
* Use of [IPSec] to protect against disclosure or modification in
transit between servers.
Use of these mechanisms is encouraged. When a message uses
end-to-end security mechanisms such as [PGP] or S/MIME [SMIME],
servers MUST be careful not to accidently destroy the integrity of
the protected content (for example, by altering any text within the
region covered by a signature while mapping between MMS and email).
Since MMS does not include a clear separation between in-transit
envelope and message content, there are increased risks of
unauthorized disclosure of information, and additional challenges in
protecting data. For example, Bcc recipients do not normally appear
in the message content, only in the envelope; care MUST be taken in
the gateway function to ensure that Bcc recipients which do appear
are deleted from the message content.
Some MMS features contain inherently more risk than others. For
example, reply charging and sender address hiding. The reply
charging mechanism requires a high degree of trust between entities
with little technical basis. Deliberate or accidental abuse of this
trust can result in unexpected or unauthorized charges. For
example, a sender may be charged for unauthorized replies, or a
Gellens [Page 28] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
sender may be charged for a reply which the author thought would be
paid for by the recipient. A sender's identity may be disclosed in
violation of a request for this to be blocked. The identity of
recipients may be disclosed to other recipients (or even
non-recipients) for a message in which the sender intended for the
recipients not to be disclosed.
It is possible to hide the sender's identity from non-recipients
using anonymous remailers. It is hard to hide the sender's identity
from recipients when the mail is cryptographically signed. In view
of anti-spam measures it may be undesirable to hide the sender's
identity.
Additional mechanisms can be developed to protect against various
threats, however, these are not included in this version of this
specification. It is strongly RECOMMENDED that features such as
reply charging and sender identity hiding not be used across carrier
domains, and be used within carrier domains only with full
understanding of the risks involved.
4 Normative References
IETF:
[DSN-Msg] "An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status
Notifications", Moore, Vaudreuil, RFC 3464, January 2003.
[DSN-SMTP] "SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status
Notifications", Moore, RFC 3461, January 2003.
[Hdr-Enc] "MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Three:
Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text", Moore, RFC 2047,
November 1996.
[KEYWORDS] Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, Harvard University, March 1997.
[MDN] "An Extensible Message Format for Message Disposition
Notifications", Fajman, RFC 2298, March 1998.
[Msg-Fmt] "Internet Message Format", Resnick, RFC 2822, April 2001.
[Report-Fmt] "The Multipart/Report Content Type for the Reporting of
Mail System Administrative Messages", Vaudreuil, RFC 3462, January
2003
Gellens [Page 29] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
[RESP] Enhanced Mail System Status Codes, Vaudreuil, RFC 1893,
January 1996.
[SMTP] "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", Klensin, RFC 2821, April
2001.
5 Informative References
IETF:
[Auth] "SMTP Service Extension for Authentication", Myers, RFC 2554,
March 1999
[BINARY] SMTP Service Extensions for Transmission of Large and
Binary MIME Messages", Vaudreuil, Parsons, RFC 3030, December 2000.
[Codes] "SMTP Service Extension for Returning Enhanced Error Codes",
Freed, RFC 2034, October 1996.
[Deliver-By] "Deliver By SMTP Service Extension", Newman, RFC 2852,
June 2000.
[Msg-Encap] "Proposed Standard for Message Encapsulation", Rose,
Stefferud, RFC 934, January 1985.
[Hdrs] "Common Internet Message Headers", J. Palme, RFC 2076,
February 1997.
[IPSec] "Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol", Kent,
Atkinson, RFC 2401, November 1998
[PGP] "MIME Security with OpenPGP", Elkins, Del Torto, Levien,
Roessler, RFC 3156, August 2001
[SMIME] "S/MIME Version 3 Message Specification", Ramsdell, RFC
2633, June 1999
[StartTLS] "SMTP Service Extension for Secure SMTP over Transport
Layer Security", Hoffman, RFC 3207, February 2002
[Submission] "Message Submission", Gellens, Klensin, RFC 2476,
December 1998.
[VPIM] "Voice Profile Internet Mail Ï- Version 2", Vaudreuil,
Parsons, RFC 2421, September 1998.
Gellens [Page 30] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
OMA:
OMA specifications are available at the OMA web site
<http://www.openmobilealliance.org>.
[OMA-MMS] OMA-WAP-MMS-ENC-V1_2-20040323-C
3GPP2 and 3GPP:
3GPP2 specifications are available at the 3GPP2 (Third
Generation Partnership Project 2) web site
<http://www.3gpp2.org>.
3GPP specifications are available at the 3GPP (Third Generation
Partnership Project) web site <http://www.3gpp.org>
[Stage_3] "MMS MM1 Stage 3 using OMA/WAP", X.S0016-310
"MMS MM4 Stage 3 Inter-Carrier Interworking", X.S0016-340
"Multimedia Messaging Service: Functional description; Stage 2", TS
23.140 Release 5.
[Formats] "Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) Media Format and
Codecs for cdma2000 Spread Spectrum SystemsÔ, C.S0045
[Overview] "Multimedia Messaging Services (MMS) Overview",
X.S0016-000
[Stage_1] "Multimedia Messaging Services (MMS); Stage 1",
Requirements, October 2002, S.R0064-0.
[Stage_2] ÓMultimedia Messaging Service (MMS); Stage 2", Functional
Specification, April 2003, X.S0016-200.
"Multimedia Messaging Service; Media formats and codecs",
TS26.140Release 5.
6 Author's Address
Randall Gellens
QUALCOMM Incorporated
5775 Morehouse Drive
San Diego, CA 92121
USA
randy@qualcomm.com
Gellens [Page 31] Expires October 2005
Internet Draft Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail April 2005
Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances
of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made
to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification
can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director.
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
Disclaimer
This document and the information contained herein are provided on
an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE
REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE
INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.
Gellens [Page 32] Expires October 2005
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 05:30:49 |