[Ietf-calsify] SMS alarm
Arnaud.Quillaud at Sun.COM
Thu Mar 20 08:59:29 PDT 2008
Probably too late but I thought I'd send this comment anyway...
A *lot* of our customers are using server triggered SMS based alarms
when currently only:
"AUDIO" / "DISPLAY" / "EMAIL" / iana-token / x-name
I have found only one email related to SMS based alarms on the calsify
It simply suggest the possibility to add more action values.
Now, instead of having to register new actions (and their associated set
of properties), couldn't we extend the definition of "EMAIL" alarms to
all forms of electronic messages ? In an EMAIL alarm, the address is
already stored in an ATTENDEE property so its value can be any RFC3986
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986> compliant URI. This means that in
theory, we could directly use:
* IM uris (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3860)
* SMS uris (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-sms-uri)
or any other form of electronic message with a known uri definition.
Unless I'm mistaken, allowing vendors to register new action values is
not enough since
limits what you can put in an alarm component:
alarmc = "BEGIN" ":" "VALARM" CRLF
(audioprop / dispprop / emailprop)
"END" ":" "VALARM" CRLF
so maybe the
x-prop / iana-prop
should be removed from audioprop/dispprop/emailprop and added at the
alarmc definition level, or an otherprop should be added whose
definition should be part of the iana registry for new actions.
It is typically the responsibility of a "Calendar User Agent" (CUA) to deliver the alarm in the specified fashion.
when from my experience, EMAIL is always ignored by CUAs and often
handled by the CS.
More information about the Ietf-calsify