summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc3342.txt
blob: c8b3181b587515a204f8fd02cf2b98d375d8041b (plain) (blame)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
1124
1125
1126
1127
1128
1129
1130
1131
1132
1133
1134
1135
1136
1137
1138
1139
1140
1141
1142
1143
1144
1145
1146
1147
1148
1149
1150
1151
1152
1153
1154
1155
1156
1157
1158
1159
1160
1161
1162
1163
1164
1165
1166
1167
1168
1169
1170
1171
1172
1173
1174
1175
1176
1177
1178
1179
1180
1181
1182
1183
1184
1185
1186
1187
1188
1189
1190
1191
1192
1193
1194
1195
1196
1197
1198
1199
1200
1201
1202
1203
1204
1205
1206
1207
1208
1209
1210
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
1221
1222
1223
1224
1225
1226
1227
1228
1229
1230
1231
1232
1233
1234
1235
Network Working Group                                           G. Klyne
Request for Comments: 3342                        Clearswift Corporation
Category: Standards Track                                        M. Rose
                                            Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
                                                             M. Schwartz
                                                   Code On The Road, LLC
                                                                E. Dixon
                                                             H. Franklin
                                                                 J. Kint
                                                                  D. New
                                                                 S. Pead
                                                               July 2002


     The Application Exchange (APEX) Option Party Pack, Part Deux!

Status of this Memo

   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   Application Exchange (APEX), at its core, provides a best-effort
   application-layer datagram service.  Options are used to alter the
   semantics of the core service.  This memo defines various options to
   change the default behavior of APEX's "relaying mesh".

















Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 1]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


Table of Contents

   1.    The attachOverride Option  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   2.    The dataTiming Option  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.1   Upper-Bounds on Delivery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.1.1 Final Hop Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   2.1.2 Timing Error Report  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   2.2   Reporting on Delayed Delivery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   2.2.1 Transient Timing Report  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   3.    The hold4Endpoint Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   4.    The dataHopping Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
   5.    Initial Registrations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   5.1   Registration: The attachOverride Option  . . . . . . . . . . 15
   5.2   Registration: The dataTiming Option  . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   5.3   Registration: The hold4Endpoint Option . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   5.4   Registration: The dataHopping Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   6.    The APEX Party Pack DTD  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
   7.    Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
         References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   A.    Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
   B.    IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
         Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
         Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

1. The attachOverride Option

   Section 5.1 contains the APEX option registration for the
   "attachOverride" option.

   The default behavior of the APEX relaying mesh, in the absence of
   processing options, is to allow at most one application to attach as
   a particular endpoint, on a "first come, first served" basis.  The
   "attachOverride" option provides gives preference to the current
   application trying to attach.

   If this option is present in the "attach" operation (c.f., Section
   4.4.1 of [1]) and if any application is already attached as the
   specified endpoint, that endpoint has its attachment terminated
   (c.f., Section 4.4.3 of [1]) concurrently with processing of that
   "attach" operation.  The "code" attribute of the resulting
   "terminate" operation is set to 556.

   Note that any data being expected by the previously-attached
   application may instead be delivered to the last application to
   successfully attach.  Accordingly, applications should take care to
   properly deal with incoming data having unrecognized transaction-
   identifiers (c.f., Section 6.1.1 of [1]).




Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 2]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   This option provides for a new attachment to automatically terminate
   any existing attachment for the same endpoint.  For example, this
   might be helpful when a new attachment is required from a different
   device while a previously-used device is still attached e.g.,

        +-------+                  +-------+
        |       | -- attach -----> |       |
        | appl. |                  | relay |
        |   #1  | <--------- ok -- |       |
        +-------+                  +-------+

      C: <attach endpoint='fred@example.com' transID='1' />
      S: <ok />

    ... some time later appl #2 starts on a different computer ...

                                   +-------+                  +-------+
                                   |       | <----- attach -- |       |
        +-------+                  |       |                  | appl. |
        |       | <-- terminate -- | relay | -- ok ---------> |   #2  |
        | appl. |                  |       |                  +-------+
        |   #1  | -- ok ---------> |       |
        +-------+                  +-------+

                C: <attach endpoint='fred@example.com' transID='2'>
                       <option internal='attachOverride' transID='3' />
                   </attach>
                S: <ok />

      C: <terminate transID='1' code='556'>overriden</terminate>
      S: <ok />

2. The dataTiming Option

   Section 5.2 contains the APEX option registration for the
   "dataTiming" option.  This option contains a "dataTiming" element
   (c.f., Section 6).

   The default behavior of the APEX relaying mesh is "immediate, best
   effort", and expects that all relays and endpoints are able to
   process and transfer data without delay -- in the absence of
   processing options, if a relay is unavailable, then data is silently
   dropped.  The "dataTiming" option provides for controlled queuing
   delays in processing, whilst providing reasonable deterministic
   behavior for the originator.






Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 3]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   There are two types of delays addressed by the "dataTiming" option:

   o  delays in transit through the relaying mesh, possibly due to
      intermittent or slow connections, or congested relays; and,

   o  delays because the intended endpoint is not available to receive
      the data, when used in conjunction with the hold4Endpoint option
      (Section 3).

   Accordingly, the "dataTiming" option allows for:

   o  data to be discarded if not delivered within a finite amount of
      time as specified using the "noLaterThan" attribute (Section 2.1);

   o  a "statusResponse" message (c.f., Section 5.1 of [1]) to be
      generated if data is not delivered within a known amount of time
      as specified using the "reportAfter" attribute (Section 2.2); and,

   o  an upper limit on the amount of time for the "statusResponse"
      message to be delivered using the "returnTrip" attribute (Section
      2.1.1), after which the sender may presume the message to be lost.

   This option does not provide any functionality with respect to the
   priority of the data.  Nor does this option have any effect on other
   parts of the relaying process.

   Further, note that because this option is processed on a per-hop
   basis, the originator must set the "targetHop" attribute to the value
   "all" and the "mustUnderstand" attribute to the value "true".

2.1 Upper-Bounds on Delivery

   The "noLaterThan" attribute of the "dataTiming" option provides for
   control over delays that may occur in transit through the relaying
   mesh or to the recipient endpoint.

   If this option is present in the "data" operation (c.f., Section
   4.4.4 of [1]) and the value of the "noLaterThan" attribute is non-
   zero, then:

   o  For Step 5.2 of Section 4.4.4.1 of [1]:

      Immediately prior to sending the data to the next relay, the value
      of the "noLaterThan" attribute is adjusted to reflect the
      processing time of the data at the local relay (e.g., the time
      required to determine the next relay, to successfully issue a
      "bind" operation, and then be ready to immediately issue a "data"
      operation).



Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 4]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


      If the value of the "noLaterThan" attribute becomes less than or
      equal to zero, an error in processing has occurred, the data
      element is not sent to the next relay, and if the "reportErrors"
      attribute is true, the APEX report service is invoked to send a
      timing error report.

   o  For Step 5.3 of Section 4.4.4.1 of [1]:

      If the relay does not receive an "ok" element from the recipient
      endpoint within the number of milli-seconds indicated by the value
      of the "noLaterThan" attribute, an error in processing has
      occurred, and if the "reportErrors" attribute is true, the APEX
      report service is invoked to send a timing error report.

      Otherwise, if the data is successfully transmitted to the
      recipient, and the "returnTrip" attribute is non-zero, the APEX
      report service is invoked to send a final hop report.

   Note that in some cases, a relay may be able to predict this outcome
   without actually connecting to the next relay; if so, a timing error
   report may be sent without connecting to the next relay.

2.1.1 Final Hop Report

   If the APEX report service (c.f., Section 6.2 of [1]) is invoked to
   send a final hop report, it issues a data operation with:

   o  its originator identifying the report service associated with the
      issuing relay

   o  its recipient identifying the endpoint address of the originator
      associated with the "dataTiming" option

   o  a new "dataTiming" option having:

      *  its "noLaterThan" attribute equal to the "returnTrip" attribute
         of the original "dataTiming" option

      *  and no other attributes present

   o  its content consisting of a "statusResponse" element having:

      *  its "transID" attribute equal to the "transID" attribute of the
         "dataTiming" option

      *  and identifying the original recipient with a permanent success
         indicator




Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 5]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   For example:

                                  +-------+                  +-------+
                                  |       | -- data -------> |       |
                                  | relay |                  | appl. |
                                  |       | <--------- ok -- |   #2  |
                                  +-------+                  +-------+

     C: <data content='cid:1@example.com'>
            <originator identity='fred@example.com' />
            <recipient identity='barney@example.com' />
            <option internal='dataTiming' targetHop='all'
                    mustUnderstand='true' transID='86'>
                <dataTiming noLaterThan='10000' returnTrip='20000' />
            </option>
        </data>
     S: <ok />

       +-------+                  +-------+
       |       | <------- data -- |       |
       | appl. |                  | relay |
       |   #1  | -- ok ---------> |       |
       +-------+                  +-------+

     C: <data content='#Content'>
            <originator identity='apex=report@example.com' />
            <recipient identity='fred@example.com' />
            <option internal='dataTiming' targetHop='all'
                    mustUnderstand='true' transID='99'>
                <dataTiming noLaterThan='20000' />
            </option>
            <data-content Name='Content'>
                <statusResponse transID='86'>
                    <destination identity='barney@example.com'>
                        <reply code='250' />
                    </destination>
                </statusResponse>
            </data-content>
        </data>
     S: <ok />











Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 6]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


2.1.2 Timing Error Report

   If the APEX report service (c.f., Section 6.2 of [1]) is invoked to
   send a timing error report, it issues a data operation with:

   o  its originator identifying the report service associated with the
      issuing relay

   o  its recipient identifying the endpoint address of the originator
      associated with the "dataTiming" option

   o  its content consisting of a "statusResponse" element having:

      *  its "transID" attribute equal to the "transID" attribute of the
         "dataTiming" option

      *  and identifying the original recipient with a permanent failure
         indicator

































Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 7]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   For example:

       +-------+                  +-------+
       |       | -- data -------> |       |
       | appl. |                  | relay |
       |       | <--------- ok -- |       |
       +-------+                  +-------+

     C: <data content='cid:1@example.com'>
            <originator identity='fred@example.com' />
            <recipient identity='barney@example.com' />
            <option internal='dataTiming' targetHop='all'
                    mustUnderstand='true' transID='86'>
                <dataTiming noLaterThan='6000' reportErrors='true' />
            </option>
        </data>
     S: <ok />

      ... some time later ...

          +-------+                  +-------+
          |       | <------- data -- |       |
          | appl. |                  | relay |
          |       | -- ok ---------> |       |
          +-------+                  +-------+

        C: <data content='#Content'>
               <originator identity='apex=report@example.com' />
               <recipient identity='fred@example.com' />
               <data-content Name='Content'>
                   <statusResponse transID='86'>
                       <destination identity='barney@example.com'>
                           <reply code='550' />
                       </destination>
                   </statusResponse>
               </data-content>
           </data>
        S: <ok />

2.2 Reporting on Delayed Delivery

   The "reportAfter" attribute of the "dataTiming" option provides for
   the originator to be notified if delivery is delayed beyond a
   specified time.  Delivery of the data is not affected.  Note that if
   the value of the "noLaterThan" attribute is non-zero, then it
   provides the operational upper-bounds for the "reportAfter"
   attribute.




Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 8]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   If this option is present in the "data" operation (c.f., Section
   4.4.4 of [1]) and the value of the "reportAfter" attribute is non-
   zero, then:

   o  For Step 5.2 of Section 4.4.4.1 of [1]:

      Immediately prior to sending the data to the next relay, the value
      of the "reportAfter" attribute is adjusted to reflect the
      processing time of the data at the local relay (e.g., the time
      required to determine the next relay, to successfully issue a
      "bind" operation, and then be ready to immediately issue a "data"
      operation).

      If the value of the "reportAfter" attribute becomes less than or
      equal to zero, then its value is set to zero and the APEX report
      service is invoked to send a transient timing report; regardless,
      the data element is sent to the next relay.

   o  For Step 5.3 of Section 4.4.4.1 of [1]:

      If the relay does not receive an "ok" element from the recipient
      endpoint within the number of milli-seconds indicated by the value
      of the "reportAfter" attribute, then its value is set to zero and
      the APEX report service is invoked to send a transient timing
      report.

2.2.1 Transient Timing Report

   If the APEX report service (c.f., Section 6.2 of [1]) is invoked to
   send a transient timing report, it issues a data operation with:

   o  its originator identifying the report service associated with the
      issuing relay

   o  its recipient identifying the endpoint address of the originator
      associated with the "dataTiming" option

   o  its content consisting of a "statusResponse" element having:

      *  its "transID" attribute equal to the "transID" attribute of the
         "dataTiming" option

      *  and identifying the original recipient with a transient success
         indicator







Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                     [Page 9]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   For example:

        +-------+                  +-------+
        |       | -- data -------> |       |
        | appl. |                  | relay |
        |   #1  | <--------- ok -- |       |
        +-------+                  +-------+

      C: <data content='cid:1@example.com'>
             <originator identity='fred@example.com' />
             <recipient identity='barney@example.com' />
             <option internal='dataTiming' targetHop='all'
                     mustUnderstand='true' transID='86'>
                 <dataTiming reportAfter='60000' />
             </option>
         </data>
      S: <ok />

    ... some time later ...

                                   +-------+                  +-------+
                                   |       | <------- data -- |       |
                                   | relay |                  | relay |
                                   |  #n-1 | -- ok ---------> |   #n  |
                                   +-------+                  +-------+

      C: <data content='#Content'>
             <originator identity='apex=report@example.com' />
             <recipient identity='fred@example.com' />
             <data-content Name='Content'>
                 <statusResponse transID='86'>
                     <destination identity='barney@example.com'>
                         <reply code='350' />
                     </destination>
                 </statusResponse>
             </data-content>
         </data>
      S: <ok />

3. The hold4Endpoint Option

   Section 5.3 contains the APEX option registration for the
   "hold4Endpoint" option.

   The default behavior of the APEX relaying mesh, in the absence of
   processing options, is to silently drop data for a recipient if its
   endpoint isn't attached.  The "hold4Endpoint" option provides for
   data to be queued if the recipient endpoint is not attached.



Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 10]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   If this option is present in the "data" operation (c.f., Section
   4.4.4 of [1]), and the value of the "hold4Endpoint" attribute is true
   then:

   o  For Step 5.3 of Section 4.4.4.1 of [1]:

      If the recipient's endpoint is not currently attached, the relay
      will queue the data waiting for an application to attach as that
      endpoint.

   Note that in the absence of an upper-bounds on delivery, such as
   limits provided by the dataTiming option (Section 2), the data will
   be queued indefinitely for the endpoint.






































Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 11]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   For example:

        +-------+                  +-------+
        |       | -- data -------> |       |
        | appl. |                  | relay |
        |   #1  | <--------- ok -- |       |
        +-------+                  +-------+

      C: <data content='cid:1@example.com'>
             <originator identity='fred@example.com' />
             <recipient identity='barney@example.com' />
             <option internal='hold4Endpoint' />
             <option internal='dataTiming' targetHop='all'
                     mustUnderstand='true' transID='86'>
                 <dataTiming noLaterThan='60000' />
             </option>
         </data>
      S: <ok />

    ... some time later the recipient's endpoint attaches ...

                                   +-------+                  +-------+
                                   |       | <----- attach -- |       |
                                   |       |                  |       |
                                   |       | -- ok ---------> |       |
                                   | relay |                  | appl. |
                                   |       | -- data -------> |   #2  |
                                   |       |                  |       |
                                   |       | <--------- ok -- |       |
                                   +-------+                  +-------+

      C: <attach endpoint='barney@example.com' transID='2'>
             <option internal='attachOverride' transID='3' />
         </attach>
      S: <ok />

      C: <data content='cid:1@example.com'>
             <originator identity='fred@example.com' />
             <recipient identity='barney@example.com' />
             <option internal='hold4Endpoint' />
             <option internal='dataTiming' targetHop='all'
                     mustUnderstand='true' transID='86'>
                 <dataTiming noLaterThan='18000' />
             </option>
         </data>
      S: <ok />





Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 12]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


4. The dataHopping Option

   To detect misconfigurations that cause forwarding loops in the APEX
   relaying mesh, the APEX pubsub service re-introduces a mechanism
   similar to the IP TTL [2] mechanism, in the form of an APEX option.
   Section 5.4 contains the APEX option registration for the
   "dataHopping" option.

   If this option is present in the "data" operation (c.f., Section
   4.4.4 of [1]) and the value of the "noMoreThan" attribute is non-
   zero, then:

   o  For Step 5.2 of Section 4.4.4.1 of [1]:

      Immediately prior to sending the data to the next relay, the value
      of the "noMoreThan" attribute is reduced by 1.

      If the value of the "noMoreThan" attribute becomes less than or
      equal to zero, an error in processing has occurred, the data
      element is not sent to the next relay, and if the "reportErrors"
      attribute is true, the APEX report service is invoked to send an
      error report.

   Further, note that because this option is processed on a per-hop
   basis, the originator must set the "targetHop" attribute to the value
   "all" and the "mustUnderstand" attribute to the value "true".

   If the APEX report service (c.f., Section 6.2 of [1]) is invoked to
   send an error report, it issues a data operation with:

   o  its originator identifying the report service associated with the
      issuing relay

   o  its recipient identifying the endpoint address of the originator
      associated with the "dataHopping" option

   o  its content consisting of a "statusResponse" element having:

      *  its "transID" attribute equal to the "transID" attribute of the
         "dataHopping" option

      *  and identifying the original recipient with a permanent failure
         indicator








Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 13]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   For example:

       +-------+                  +-------+
       |       | -- data -------> |       |
       | appl. |                  | relay |
       |       | <--------- ok -- |   #1  |
       +-------+                  +-------+

     C: <data content='cid:1@example.com'>
            <originator identity='appl=pubsub/topic=fred@example.com' />
            <recipient identity='barney@example.com' />
            <option internal='dataHopping' targetHop='all'
                    mustUnderstand='true' transID='86'>
                <dataHopping noMoreThan='2' reportErrors='true' />
            </option>
        </data>
     S: <ok />
                                  +-------+                  +-------+
                                  |       | -- data -------> |       |
                                  | relay |                  | relay |
                                  |   #1  | <--------- ok -- |   #2  |
                                  +-------+                  +-------+

     C: <data content='cid:1@example.com'>
            <originator identity='appl=pubsub/topic=fred@example.com' />
            <recipient identity='barney@example.com' />
            <option internal='dataHopping' targetHop='all'
                    mustUnderstand='true' transID='86'>
                <dataHopping noMoreThan='1' reportErrors='true' />
            </option>
        </data>
     S: <ok />



















Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 14]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   relay #2 determines that further relaying is necessary:

       +-------+                  +-------+
       |       | <------- data -- |       |
       | relay |                  | relay |
       |   #1  | -- ok ---------> |   #2  |
       +-------+                  +-------+

     C: <data content='#Content'>
            <originator identity='apex=report@example.com' />
            <recipient identity='appl=pubsub/topic=fred@example.com' />
            <data-content Name='Content'>
                <statusResponse transID='86'>
                    <destination identity='barney@example.com'>
                        <reply code='550' />
                    </destination>
                </statusResponse>
            </data-content>
        </data>
     S: <ok />

5. Initial Registrations

   The APEX option registration template is defined in Section 7.1 of
   [1].

5.1 Registration: The attachOverride Option

   Option Identification: attachOverride

   Present in: APEX's "attach" element

   Contains: nothing

   Processing Rules: c.f., Section 1

   Contact Information: c.f., the "Authors' Addresses" section of this
      memo













Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 15]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


5.2 Registration: The dataTiming Option

   Option Identification: dataTiming

   Present in: APEX's "data" element

   Contains: dataTiming (c.f., Section 6)

   Processing Rules: c.f., Section 2

   Contact Information: c.f., the "Authors' Addresses" section of this
      memo

5.3 Registration: The hold4Endpoint Option

   Option Identification: hold4Endpoint

   Present in: APEX's "data" element

   Contains: nothing

   Processing Rules: c.f., Section 3

   Contact Information: c.f., the "Authors' Addresses" section of this
      memo

5.4 Registration: The dataHopping Option

   Option Identification: dataHopping

   Present in: APEX's "data" element

   Contains: dataHopping (c.f., Section 6)

   Processing Rules: c.f., Section 4

   Contact Information: c.f., the "Authors' Addresses" section of this
      memo













Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 16]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


6. The APEX Party Pack DTD

   <!--
     DTD for the APEX option party pack, as of 2001-05-14


     Refer to this DTD as:

       <!ENTITY % APEXPARTY PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD APEX PARTY//EN" "">
       %APEXPARTY;
     -->

   <!ENTITY % APEXCORE PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD APEX CORE//EN"
   %APEXCORE;

   <!--
     DTD data types:

          entity        syntax/reference     example
          ======        ================     =======
       hopcount
           HOPS         0..255               17

       milli-seconds
           MILLISECS    0..2147483647        60000
     -->

   <!ENTITY  % HOPS     "CDATA">
   <!ENTITY  % MILLISECS
                         "CDATA">


   <!ELEMENT dataHopping EMPTY>
   <!ATTLIST dataHopping
             noMoreThan  %HOPS;            "0"
             reportErrors
                         (true|false)      "false">

   <!ELEMENT dataTiming  EMPTY>
   <!ATTLIST dataTiming
             noLaterThan %MILLISECS;       "0"
             returnTrip  %MILLISECS;       "0"
             reportAfter %MILLISECS;       "0"
             reportErrors
                         (true|false)      "false">






Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 17]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


7. Security Considerations

   Consult [1]'s Section 11 for a discussion of security issues.

   In addition:

   o  The dataTiming option (Section 2) may be used to expose private
      network topology.  Accordingly, an administrator may wish to
      choose to disable this option except at the ingress/egress points
      for its administrative domain.

   o  The hold4Endpoint option (Section 3) may be used to facilitate
      denial-of-service attacks.  Accordingly, an administrator may wish
      to impose administrative limits on this attribute (e.g., always
      require that the "dataTiming" option also be present with a
      short-lived "noLaterThan" attribute).

References

   [1]   Rose, M., Klyne, G. and D. Crocker, "The Application Exchange
         Core", RFC 3340, July 2002.

   [2]   Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September
         1981.

   [3]   Newman, D., "Deliver By SMTP Service Extension", RFC 2852, June
         2000.
























Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 18]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


Appendix A. Acknowledgements

   The authors gratefully acknowledge the contributions of Chris Newman
   and Bob Wyman.  Further, the dataTiming option is similar in function
   to "Deliver By" SMTP service extension defined by Dan Newman in [3].

Appendix B. IANA Considerations

   The IANA completed the registrations specified in Section 5.










































Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 19]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


Authors' Addresses

   Graham Klyne
   Clearswift Corporation
   1310 Waterside
   Arlington Business Park
   Theale, Reading  RG7 4SA
   UK

   Phone: +44 11 8903 8903
   EMail: Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com


   Marshall T. Rose
   Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
   POB 255268
   Sacramento, CA  95865-5268
   US

   Phone: +1 916 483 8878
   EMail: mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us


   Michael F. Schwartz
   Code On The Road, LLC

   EMail: schwartz@CodeOnTheRoad.com
   URI:   http://www.CodeOnTheRoad.com


   Eric Dixon

   EMail: edixon@myrealbox.com


   Huston Franklin

   EMail: huston@franklin.ro


   Jay Kint

   EMail: d20@icosahedron.org








Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 20]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


   Darren New
   5390 Caminito Exquisito
   San Diego, CA  92130
   US

   Phone: +1 858 350 9733
   EMail: dnew@san.rr.com


   Scott Pead

   EMail: spead@fiber.net







































Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 21]
^L
RFC 3342       The Application Exchange (APEX) Party Pack      July 2002


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Klyne, et. al.              Standards Track                    [Page 22]
^L