[caldeveloper-l] Proposed draft: Caldav-scheduling-controls

[Helge Heß]

On 6. Jun 2018, at 06:37, Bron Gondwana <brong at fastmailteam.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 6, 2018, at 08:56, Helge Heß wrote:
>> I don’t like the header a lot, I’d prefer something like
>> 
>>   Scheduling: none / internal / all / X-??
>> 
>> over
>> 
>>   Scheduling-Enabled: F
> 
> I am happy with either.  The default would be "all" of course in your example.

Yes.

I think you get the point of “internal”, but maybe the keyword is wrong? Maybe “local”? Or should this take a list of domains? Maybe we should have just “none”, “all” and “X-" first :-)

>> I think the reason why people have been reluctant introducing that is that if you have this header, you can’t reliably know anymore whether something was scheduled or not (and a big motivation was that this decision MUST be taken off the client, because unreliable).
> 
> This has always annoyed me that the client can't even be trusted to send a header

Remember that just one rogue client is necessary and you end up w/ the question: Why do I have this meeting in the database, but it wasn’t scheduled properly? (or more exactly, this proposal introduces this issue, even though I still think that we need it).

>> What I don’t remember is how bulk-upload deals with that (https://github.com/evert/calendarserver-extensions/blob/master/calendarserver-bulk-change.txt). Is that implicitly off, does it explicitly support the functionality?

Can we revisit ^^^? Does someone know how this works? I’m sure it disables scheduling, but I don’t remember how.


>> # Schedule-Address header
>> 
>> I don’t understand this one. CalDAV does support aliases in the address-set.
>> And when setting an attendee it is the clients choice which address to use (either as the EMAIL attribute or the attendee URI).
> 
> What does your server do if two of the addresses in address set are invited?

I’m still missing the context here, can you give a specific example?

Is this a server internal scheduling operation? If so, it sees that both belong to the same target user and schedules them.
Or is it about an iMIP external scheduling fanout? You send the request to both since you can’t know that they are the same.

The From should be clear because the ORGANIZER can only occur once, right? And for REPLYs it should also be clear from the request-context what address this is about.


> What do you do if the user has an alias *@example.com but there are some carve-out addresses which belong to somebody else?

An email alias? Aren’t we talking about CalDAV? You cannot send to “*@example.com” in CalDAV, nor can you add this to the user addresses?

hh

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 874 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.calconnect.org/pipermail/caldeveloper-l-calconnect.org/attachments/20180607/74011263/attachment.sig>