March, 2003

Introduction
• The Mobile Messaging experience differs from current Internet Email experience
– Mobile user expects “push model” of message delivery
– Devices have limited (and varied) media rendering capabilities
– Many mobile networks are bandwidth starved and
“unreliable”.
• Multiple solutions have appeared
– New protocols are being invented
– Interoperability is a challenge
• Internet Email protocols should be enhanced
– to support mobile messaging requirements
– meet the needs of mobile users
Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging Openwave Systems

Mobile Message Flow
Mobile
Client
(1)
Submit msg
(2)
Notification
Mobile
Client
(5)
Alert User
Server
(3)
Retrieval request
(4)
Retrieval request
•
Current mobile messaging practices analyzed in draft-stebrose-lemonade-mmsarch-00.txt
• Mobile messaging and desktop messaging experience have many similarities and a number of key differences
• Push model using active notification
Openwave Systems Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging

Mobile Messaging Requirements 1
• “Push” Delivery model
– enabling messages to "just show up" on the device,
• Flexible addressing
– RFC2822, E.164, and "short codes" addressing
• MIME-based encapsulation:
– Large, multimedia message support
• End-to-end Delivery Reports and Read Reports
• Content adaptation:
– Smart network model:
• Client capabilities and profile discovery by the server
• Automatic content adaptation upon retrieval
– Smart client model:
• Client-directed message content type retrieval
• Client-directed content adaptation and retrieval
• Device-independent presentation language
– enable uniform presentation for both mobile and fixed-line clients
Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging Openwave Systems

Mobile Messaging Requirements 2
• Notifications filter
– User configurable
– Server-based filtering
– SPAM control even more critical than for e-mail
• Message exchange with existing Internet email systems
• Mailbox support (network-based persistent storage)
• Network-based and/or application-based authentication
• Bandwidth saving features such as:
– binary transfers
– data compression
– forward without download
– streamlined client- server message submission and retrieval
– pipelining to reduce transaction counts and RTT latencies
Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging Openwave Systems

What’s all the fuss about, can’t we already do this?
• Not today – Internet messaging needs some enhancements and adjustments
Internet Mobile Messaging Requirements:
• email + notification + content adaptation
• gets us most of the way there
• Solutions must comply with established Internet Protocol requirements:
• end-to-end connectivity
• broad applicability
• reuse of existing protocols
• device and network independence
• smart endpoints
• service-oriented network functions
Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging Openwave Systems

How Do We Fill the Gaps
Notification
•
Some proposals exist, none seem to completely fit the bill
• Ideal solution should be applicable to all forms of messaging and content types
• LEMONADE needs to work on notification solution
Content Adaptation
• Alternatives
1.
Smart client analyzes content and selectively requests adaptation and/or download. eg: IMAP “CHANNEL http:” performs content adaptation based on HTTP Accept and/or USERAGENT
2.
Capabilities exchange and “automatic” network based adaptation
Presentation Languages
• Use SMIL/XHTML/XML for both mobile and wireline clients
User Configurable Filters
• Use SIEVE (RFC 3028)
• Configuration of filters from clients is outside scope of LEMONADE
Openwave Systems Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging

How Do We Fill the Gaps (continued)
Payload compression
• Use IMAP Binary to avoid base64 expansion
• compression best handled at network layers
Forward Without Download
• SMTP or IMAP APPEND “Outbox” with IMAP URL in MIME part:
Content-type: Message/External-body, access-type=URL; URL=“IMAP: …”
Streamlined Submission and Retrieval
• Proposal made in 3GPP2:
X.P0016-311 MMS MM1 using M-IMAP
• Features:
• Manage submissions & retrievals over one connection to one server
• Basically IMAP with these enhancements:
• Pipelining (avoiding unnecessary transactions and RTT latencies)
• Brevity (omission of unneeded response text)
• DELIVER extension command (for submission & forwarding)
Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging Openwave Systems

Proposal for Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging
Mobile
Client
(1)
Submit msg
(SMTP)
(2)
Notification
(???)
Mobile
Client
SMTP/
IMAP4
Server
(3)
Retrieval request
(IMAP)
Feature
Submission (1)
Notification (2)
(4)
Retrieval request
(IMAP)
Suggested Protocol
SMTP or IMAP APPEND “Outbox” push delivery + URI
Retrieval (3) (4) IMAP FETCH [BINARY] or IMAP Channel:http
Forwarding SMTP or IMAP APPEND “Outbox” w/IMAP URL
Addressing RFC2822, E.164 & RFC2916
Notification filters SIEVE RFC3028
Content adaptation IMAP Channel http:
Openwave Systems Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging

Conclusion
• Internet Messaging Protocols should be improved to fulfill mobile messaging requirements.
• Why?
– Avoid creating new messaging protocols and reuse existing enhanced messaging protocols with enhancements
– Simplify Internet email interworking and avoid messaging gateways
– Reinforce basic IP end-to-end application architecture
• Changes are required to “mobilize” Internet email
– Push based notification
– Content adaptation
– Forwarding (without downloading)
– Presentation language
This presentation proposes potential solutions that
LEMONADE should consider
Internet Standards Based Mobile Messaging Openwave Systems