Agenda - CALSCH working group

• Agenda bashing• Guide to Internet Calendaring draft update

– inclusion of Timezone data, most recent changes– additional examples added, what is missing/needed

• iCalendar updates ( iTIP,iRIP status,iMIP if necessary) – Eric Busboom added as an Editor; Bruce Kahn as Method

Reviewer– status of CRISP (iRIP replacement draft), changes (typos

fixed, adjustments)– recurrence rules

• CAP update – additional issues for CAP, restriction tables work– timezone efforts

• Plans for Winter CalConnect & SKICAL Update

iCalendar updates - Recurrence Rules Issues (1)

• (1) In a YEARLY frequency with BYMONTH and/or BYWEEKNO set, does the BYDAY modifier apply to the year day, the month day, or the week day?

• (2) The BYYEARDAY part, for a given year, effectively specifies the month, day of month, and week number, so other BYXX rule parts for month,day of month and week number may conflict.

• (3) BYWEEKNO implies a month, conflicting with BYMONTH

• (4) MONTHLY recurrences (FREQ=MONTHLY) conflict with BYYEARDAY and BYWEEKNO.

• (5) WEEKLY recurrences (FREQ=WEEKLY) conflict with BYMONTHDAY and BYYEARDAY.

iCalendar updates - Recurrence Rules Issues (2)

• (6) BYSETPOS is limited to 366 positive values or 366*2 positive and negative values in a sufficiently large set. A complete expansion for every second in every day of the year would result in much larger sets.(Do we need BYSETPOS?)

• (7) The algorithm to calculate the first week in the year may be awkward, since some people/countries may be used to other numbering schemes. Maybe there should be a choice of a few schemes for this.

• (8) What do you do with a WEEKLY recurrence if it has BYDAY=2TU ?

iCalendar updates - Recurrence Rules Issues (1)

Proposed additional text for RFC2445, section 4.3.10. Numbers in parenthesis refer to previous issues.

• There are two types of BYxxx rules; date BYxxx rule parts that specify time periods equal to or longer than a day, and time BYxxx rule parts that specify the time periods less than a day. The day BYxxx rule parts are :

– BYMONTH, BYWEEKNO, BYYEARDAY, BYMONTHDAY and BYDAY. The time BYxxx rule parts are BYHOUR, BYMINUTE, and BYSECOND. BYSETPOS is neither a date rule part nor time rule part.

• Not all date BYxxx rule parts can appear simultaneously in a single recurrence rule. Date BYxxx rule part restrictions are:

– [a] If the BYYEARDAY part appears in a rule , no other date rule part may appear. (2)

– [b] BYWEEKNO and BYMONTH rule parts may not both appear. (3)[ except when week covers two months?]

• Not all date rule parts may be used with all recurrence intervals.

– [c] For MONTHLY recurrences neither BYYEARDAY nor BYWEEKNO may appear. (4)

– [d] For WEEKLY recurrences neither BYMONTHDAY nor BYYEARDAY may appear. (5)

iCalendar updates - Recurrence Rules Issues (2)

• There are no restrictions regarding combinations of date rule parts and time rule parts. There are no restrictions with using any combination of time rule part.

• For FREQ=WEEKLY, BYDAY rule parts MUST have integer values of 1, or the integer value MUST be omitted. "FREQ=WEEKLY;BYDAY=TU" is valid, but "FREQ=WEEKLY;BYDAY=2TU" is not. (8)

• The text does not address (1), (6) and (7)

Additional Issues for CAP• 1. Data Integrity must be assured

– What goes in must come out in basically the same format

• 2. Need to explicitly “spell out” mutual trust model of CAP– Does SASL handle this?

• 3. Ensuring signature and encryption of original CS request

• 4. Add coding to handle turning CAP entries into iTIP (fanout)

• 5. Need to clearly define the iTIP and CAP workflow

iTIP / iMIP Updates

CONFIRM Method

• Problem: REQUEST is overloaded.

• Proposal: CONFIRM– Reply to REFRESH– ATTENDEE or ORGANIZER changes

• iTIP has been updated for CONFIRM

• New Proposal: remove it

iTIP COUNTER

• Problem: which Attendee sent the COUNTER?

• Proposal: ATTSENDER parameter– when the component method is COUNTER– for one Attendee who issued the COUNTER

• Added to iTIP

Adding / Removing Attendees

• Problem: Organizer adds or removes Attendees – Send to affected Attendees?

– Send to all Attendees?

– iTIP is not clear

• Proposal: Organizer can send the update just to the affected Attendees. No SEQUENCE number update needed.

• Updated in iTIP

Intolerant iMIP Receivers

• Problem: RFC2447 does not state which MIME encapsulations MUST be supported

• Proposal: conforming iMIP implementations MUST be able to receive the described encapsulations in iMIP

• Updated in iMIP• Issue: missing encapsulations?

– Multipart/mixed– What else?

Garbage in Examples

• Problem: Some examples contain "Error! Bookmark not defined" and some contain parse errors

• "Error! Bookmark not defined" problems fixed• Updated in iTIP• Remaining Issues

– Not all parse problems have been identified

– Help wanted

New Problem: Remove Me

• Problem: Currently no way for an Attendee to ask to be removed.

• Proposals:– Reply with a comment “remove me” in a

COMMENT– Reply with ATTREMOVE– PARTSTAT=REMOVE

CAP Draft Status

Draft Status

• Word doc – to nroff – to Word – to XML?

• Restriction Tables added

• Example updates did not make it, we’ll resubmit

What’s Left To Do?

• Still needs end-to-end review (help wanted)• Asynchronous error reporting• Review schema definition (help wanted)• Many examples still needed

– Method change in fanout (CREATED, REQUEST)– Minimal component write,and results of full read back– Permissions to write some properties, attempt to write

all properties, what happens? Fail all or write everything for which you have permission ?

– Others?

• Synchronization: is current command set sufficient?

Plan

• Resubmit draft by Jan 22:– Existing examples fixed– Incorporate recent comments

• Address the “what’s left to do” list for next meeting.

Winter CALCONNECT

• Third Week of February, 2002 • 2 day session• San Jose area• Need to ensure we address:

– Scheduling

– MIME multipart

• What will be provided:– Location

– Hub and server

– Access to the Internet (??)