Glenn Parsons (gparsons@nortelnetworks.com)
Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:45:47 -0500
FYI, the current 'status' of various message headers is in Jacob Palme's ID
update of RFC 2076:
draft-palme-mailext-headers-05.txt
Cheers,
Glenn.
> ----------
> From: Vaudreuil, Greg M (Greg)
> Sent: Monday, November 5, 2001 10:45 AM
> To: Shapira, Noam; snap@lists.neystadt.org; vpim@lists.neystadt.org
> Subject: RE: [VPIM] SNAP draft
>
>
> I would suggest renaming the field to "msgimportance" rather than
> "msgpriority". Importance is the accepted term for what I think you are
> trying to indicate. This is a standard field in X.400 and imported into
> Internet mail by MIXER and VPIM. The attributes of such are "low, normal,
> high".
>
> We have debated long over the differences between importance and priority.
> Priority is now considered a delivery-system (SMTP-level) attribute
> intended
> to modify queueing behavior and is not standardized in Internet mail. In
> this sense, it is doubtful if a SNAP client will have access to the
> priority
> information even if it was there. Importance is a user-presentation
> attributes intended to convey the senders sense of importance of the
> message
> to the recipient.
>
> Urgency as a value of importance is somewhat unusual. (I think Stephen
> Covey "seven habits of highly effective people" makes a clear distinction
> between urgency and importance... ) To the best of my knowledge, we have
> not standardized a message attribute for "urgency".
>
> Please don't map non-standard attributes to a standard one. If you wish to
> support vendor-X's X- headers, then support the provision of separate X-
> attributes in SNAP. The risk of commingling the standard and non-standard
> is that the receiver can't definatively know the semantics of what was
> received.
>
> Greg V.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shapira, Noam [mailto:Shapira_Noam@icomverse.com]
> Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2001 12:12 PM
> To: snap@lists.neystadt.org; vpim@lists.neystadt.org
> Subject: [VPIM] SNAP draft
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> After a long time, I am about to submit the SNAP next draft. During the
> work
> I had a few things that I would like to share with you and get your
> comments.
>
> As part of the specification, the messaging server sends the message
> priority and message sensitivity as part of the SNAP.
>
> The attributes are defined as follows:
>
> 3.5.2 MsgSensitivity
>
> If the Sensitivity header is present, the string value SHOULD be
> provided in this attribute.
>
> 3.5.13 MsgPriority
>
> Priority of message. Legal values are 'Urgent', 'Low' or 'Normal'.
> If X-Priority headers is present its value SHOULD be used; values
> of 1 or 2 for urgent, 3 for normal, 4 or 5 for low.
> If Importance header is present, its value SHOULD be used.
> If both are present, source SHOULD use the Importance header.
>
> These 2 attributes are not mapped to another RFC or draft - as I am not
> sure
> it is standardized.
>
> Does any one have a comment?
>
> Noam Shapira
> Notification Group Leader
> Corporate Components R&D
> 3Log and MM Division
> Comverse
> Tel: 972-3-766-3605
> Mobile: 972-58-543605
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent to you, since you are subscribed to
> > vpim@lists.neystadt.org. You can manage your subscription at
> http://www.neystadt.org/cgi-bin/majordomo
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent to you, since you are subscribed to
> > vpim@lists.neystadt.org. You can manage your subscription at
> http://www.neystadt.org/cgi-bin/majordomo
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Mon Nov 05 2001 - 20:50:46 IST