Glenn Parsons (gparsons@nortelnetworks.com)
Tue, 23 Oct 2001 11:59:13 -0400
> > In some cases though, we have determined that enhanced UM features
> > are better served by extensions to IMAP (draft-ema-vpim-cb-02.txt).
>
> I'm not seeing any extensions to IMAP in that draft. Could you
> clarify?
>
This document is the requirements ... and some easy solutions.
> Or are you referring to draft-nerenberg-imap-binary-00.txt?
>
This and draft-nerenberg-imap-channel-00.txt are proposed protocols.
> > In any case, my point is that we have considered these issues, have
> > proposed solutions and are in the midst of last calling the
> > documents. I would suggest that you take a look at some of the past
> > meeting minutes for some history, and then review the existing
> > drafts and provide some comments.
>
> I took a look at the meeting minutes from the last several meetings.
> The movement towards more intelligent UAs is the right one, IMHO.
> However, I think we need something that works now.
>
> We are investigating deploying a Unified Messaging product in the near
> term, and we really would like our customers to be able to forward a
> voice mail with their MUA and have it recognized as a voice mail, even
> if only by our own customers. We aren't comfortable asking our
> customers to change their MUA.
>
With IVM you don't have to.
> I am discussing this problem with a couple of UM vendors. If we can
> come up with a workable solution, then it will be deployed. I have to
> believe that this same issue is coming up across the industry. We
> can't afford to wait until the MUAs have explict support for VPIM/IVM.
>
Remember VPIM is different than IVM.
> As I see it, either each UM vendor will have their own workaround for
> this issue,
>
Most already have.
> or the communitity can draft a standard and ask our UM
> vendors to implement it.
>
We did. it's called IVM.
> I think it's in the interest of the entire
> community to come up with a solution for the right now.
>
I do not understand how support for IVM (which does not require any changes
in what you call the MUA) will not meet your requirements. Its goal
(perhaps you should read the IVM Requirements draft) sounds to be the same
as yours. Could you clarify?
Cheers,
Glenn.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Oct 23 2001 - 18:01:15 IST