Subject: [Simple] Updated presence spec

From: Jonathan Rosenberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 17:33:06 -0400

Folks,

I've just submitted an update to the presence spec based on comments
received during the last call period. Until it appears in the archives, you
can pick up a copy at:

http://www.jdrosen.net/papers/draft-ietf-simple-presence-03.txt

There are no open issues that I am aware of. Hopefully this one will go to
IESG.

Thanks,
Jonathan R.

---
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D.                72 Eagle Rock Ave.
Chief Scientist                             First Floor
dynamicsoft                                 East Hanover, NJ 07936
[email-masked]                     FAX:   (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net                      PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.dynamicsoft.com

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 17:36:12 -0400

Jonathan,

In reviewing the new document, I noticed something troublesome about the
migration description:

It suggests that a PUA can indicate ability to act as a PA by sending a
REGISTER with a caller preferences "methods" parameter listing
SUBSCRIBE, and goes on to say that a PUA MUST NOT do this unless it
knows definitively that it has complete presence information for a user.
The problem with this is that the PUA may also be a UA for reasons other
than presence, and may need to support SUBSCRIBE for event packages
other than presence. Then it is stuck - it is forced to implement PUA
functionality as a precondition to advertising support for the other
event package.

	Paul Kyzivat

Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> simple mailing list
> [email-masked]
> http://mailman.dynamicsoft.com/mailman/listinfo/simple