<abstract>This specification defines a Jingle application type for transferring files between two entities. The protocol provides a modular framework that enables the exchange of information about the file to be transferred as well as the negotiation of parameters such as the transport to be used.</abstract>
<li>Clarified the order of events (Jingle, then transport) when the session is terminated</li>
<li>Added section on determining spport, including service discovery feature for multi-file support</li>
<li>Removed the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:info:2' namespace by putting all elements into the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3' namespace</li>
<li>Incremented namespace version from 2 to 3</li>
<remark><p>Added multi-file use case; updated spec to reflect XEP-0260 and XEP-0261; added algorithm attribute from XEP-0096; increased namespace versions from 1 to 2.</p></remark>
<remark><p>Clarified usage of Jingle actions as well as several ambiguous points in the text, including use of the range feature from XEP-0096.</p></remark>
<li>Because the jingle-s5b and jingle-ibb transport methods are backward-incompatible, incremented protocol version number from 0 to 1 and changed namespace from urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:0 to urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:2.</li>
<remark><p>Initial published version.</p></remark>
</revision>
<revision>
<version>0.0.3</version>
<date>2008-02-29</date>
<initials>psa</initials>
<remark><p>Corrected use of content-replace action; specified that the In-Band Bytestreams transport method is mandatory-to-implement but must have the lowest preference order.</p></remark>
</revision>
<revision>
<version>0.0.2</version>
<date>2008-02-28</date>
<initials>psa</initials>
<remark>Modified negotiation flow to use new content-replace action.</remark>
<p>&xep0096; was the original XMPP protocol extension for file transfer negotiation. However, that protocol has several drawbacks, most related to the &xep0095; protocol on which it depends:</p>
<li>It does not enable a true, bidirectional negotiation; instead, the initiator sets the terms for the file transfer and the responder either accepts the terms or cancels the negotiation.</li>
<li>It is the only technology in the Jabber/XMPP protocol "stack" that uses <cite>XEP-095: Stream Initiation</cite>. More modern technologies such as voice and video session negotiation use &xep0166;, and it would be helpful if implementors could re-use the same code for all negotiation use cases.</li>
<p>Jingle file transfer is only as reliable as the transports on which it depends. In particular, SOCKS5 Bytestreams ("S5B") does not always result in NAT or firewall traversal. To work around that problem, this specification requires all implementations to support as a fallback mechanism In-Band Bytestreams ("IBB"), which usually results in a successful (if slow) file transfer.</p>
<p>Note: It is likely that a future version of this specification will also recommend implementation of a Jingle transport method that emulates the IETF's ICE-TCP technology, which is currently a work in progress (see &ice-tcp;); however, a future Jingle ICE-TCP transport method is dependent on the outcome of IETF work in this area.</p>
<p>First, the party that wishes to initiate the file transfer determines the responder's capabilities (via &xep0030; or &xep0115;). Here we assume that the responder supports the following service discovery features:</p>
<li>An application type of "urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3". In particular, the <description/> element contains an <offer/> element or a <request/> element that in turn contains one or more <file/> elements defining a file to be sent.</li>
<li>An appropriate transport method. So far the suggested methods are jingle-s5b (<cite>XEP-0260</cite>) and, as a fallback, jingle-ibb (<cite>XEP-0261</cite>).</li>
<p>In this example, the initiator is <romeo@montague.lit>, the responder is <juliet@capulet.lit>, the application type is a file offer, and the transport method is jingle-s5b.</p>
<p>Note: As in <cite>XEP-0096</cite>, inclusion of the <range/> child of the <file/> element indicates that the initiatior supports ranged transfers as described below under <linkurl='#range'>Ranged Transfers</link>.</p>
<p>Note: Computing the hash of the file before sending it can slow down the process of file transfer, since the sending application needs to process the file twice. The sender might prefer to send the hash after the file transfer has begun, using a transport-info message as described under <linkurl='#hash'>Communicating the Hash</link>.</p>
<p>The initiator then attempts to initiate a SOCKS5 Bytestream with the responder as described in <cite>XEP-0260</cite> and <cite>XEP-0065</cite>. In the meantime, the responder returns a Jingle session-accept. In the session-accept message, the <file/> element MAY contain a <range/> element to indicate that the receiver also supports ranged transfers as described below under <linkurl='#range'>Ranged Transfers</link>.</p>
<p>Once one client has successfully created a connection, it sends a <candidate-used/> element to the peer inside a Jingle transport-info message. If a client receives a candidate-used notification it SHOULD continue trying to connect to candidates sent by its peer if it has not tried all candidates with a higher priority than the one successfully used by the peer.</p>
<examplecaption="Initiator sends candidate-used in Jingle transport-info"><![CDATA[
<p>Once the transfer is completed, either party can acknowledge completion (see <linkurl='#multi'>Sending Multiple Files</link>) or terminate the Jingle session; preferably this is done by the entity that receives the file to ensure that the complete file (up to the advertised size) has been received.</p>
<p>After terminating the session, the parties would close the data transport as described in the relevant specification (e.g., <cite>XEP-0260</cite> or <cite>XEP-0261</cite>).</p>
<p>At any time during the lifetime of the file transfer session, the hosting entity (i.e., the entity where the file resides) can communicate the checksum of the file to the receiving entity. This is done by sending a session-info message containing a <checksum/> element qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3' namespace, which in turn contains a <file/> element that MUST at least contain a child element of <hashes/> qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:hashes:0' namespace and MAY contain other elements qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3' namespace (e.g. <name/> and <date/>). Each <hash/> child of the <hashes/> element contains a checksum of the file contents produced in accordance with the hashing function specified by the 'algo' attribute, which MUST be one of the functions listed in the &ianahashes;.</p>
<section1topic='Aborting a Transfer'anchor='abort'>
<p>If either party wishes to abort the transfer of a file but not the entire session (e.g., when the parties are exchanging multiple files), it SHOULD send a Jingle session-info message containing an <abort/> child element qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3' namespace.</p>
<examplecaption="Initiator aborts transfer of file"><![CDATA[
<p>If either party wishes to end the entire file transfer session instead of aborting transfer of a particular file, it MUST instead send a session-terminate message containing a reason of <cancel/> as described in <cite>XEP-0166</cite>.</p>
<p>After terminating the session, the parties would close the data transport as described in the relevant specification (e.g., <cite>XEP-0260</cite> or <cite>XEP-0261</cite>).</p>
<p>If the entity that hosts a file has advertised its existence (or if a previous file transfer attempt has failed and the receiver would like to initiate another attempt), the entity that wishes to receive the file can "pull" the file from the hosting entity. This is done by sending a Jingle session-initiate to the hosting entity, including a &DESCRIPTION; element qualified by the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3' namespace and containing a <request/> element that defines the requested file.</p>
<p>Note: If the requesting entity knows the hash of the file, it can include only that metadata in its request. If not, the requesting entity needs to include enough metadata to uniquely identify the file, such as the date, name, and size. For similar considerations, see &rfc5547;.</p>
<p>As in <cite>XEP-0096</cite>, a transfer can include only part of a file (e.g., to restart delivery of a truncated transfer session at a point other than the start of the file). This is done using the <range/> element from <cite>XEP-0096</cite>. The usage is illustrated in the following examples.</p>
<p>Let us imagine that the parties negotiate a file transfer session using, say, In-Band Bytestreams. During the transfer, the recipient goes offline unexpectedly and IBB stanzas from the sender to the recipient begin to bounce. When the recipient comes back online, the recipient could initiate a new Jingle session (to retrieve the file) and specify that it wants to receive all chunks after byte 270336 (which might be the 66th chunk of size 4096).</p>
<examplecaption="Receiver requests hosted file, with range"><![CDATA[
<p>Alternatively, the sender could initiate a new file transfer, indicating that it supports ranged transfers, and in the Jingle session-accept message the receiver could indicate that it wants the transfer to begin at the specified offset.</p>
<p>After terminating the session, the parties would close the data transport as described in the relevant specification (e.g., <cite>XEP-0260</cite> or <cite>XEP-0261</cite>).</p>
<p>Support for transferring multiple files is OPTIONAL. If an application supports multi-file exchange, it MUST advertise a service discovery feature of "urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:multi".</p>
<p>All implementations MUST support the Jingle In-Band Bytestreams Transport Method (<cite>XEP-0261</cite>) as a reliable method of last resort. An implementation SHOULD support other transport methods as well, especially the Jingle SOCKS5 Bytestreams Transport Method (<cite>XEP-0260</cite>).</p>
<p>An application MAY present transport methods in any order, except that the Jingle In-Band Bytestreams Transport Method MUST be the lowest preference.</p>
<p>Support for Jingle file transfer can be determined through discovery of the 'urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3' namespace &VNOTE;, via either service discovery (<cite>XEP-0030</cite>) or entity capabilities (<cite>XEP-0115</cite>). If the initiator knows that the responder supports Jingle file transfer, it SHOULD first attempt negotiation using Jingle rather than Stream Initiation.</p>
<p>To advertise its support for the Jingle File Transfer, when replying to service discovery information ("disco#info") requests an entity MUST return URNs for any version of this protocol that the entity supports -- e.g., "urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:3" for this version &VNOTE;.</p>
<examplecaption="Service discovery information request"><![CDATA[
<p>As noted, if an application supports exchange of multiple files, it MUST advertise a service discovery feature of "urn:xmpp:jingle:apps:file-transfer:multi".</p>
<p>In order for an application to determine whether an entity supports this protocol, where possible it SHOULD use the dynamic, presence-based profile of service discovery defined in &xep0115;. However, if an application has not received entity capabilities information from an entity, it SHOULD use explicit service discovery instead.</p>
<p>For historical reasons and for backward-compatibility with <cite>XEP-0096</cite>, the hashing algorithm used in computing the file checksum defaults to MD5. It is RECOMMENDED for implementations to use stronger hashing algorithms.</p>
<p>In order to secure the data stream, implementations SHOULD use encryption methods appropriate to the transport method being used. For example, end-to-end encryption can be negotiated over either SOCKS5 Bytestreams or In-Band Bytestreams as described in <cite>XEP-0260</cite> and <cite>XEP-0261</cite>.</p>
<p>Refer to <cite>XEP-0047</cite>, <cite>XEP-0065</cite>, <cite>XEP-0096</cite>, <cite>XEP-0260</cite>, and <cite>XEP-0261</cite> for related security considerations.</p>
<p>Upon advancement of this specification from a status of Experimental to a status of Draft, the ®ISTRAR; shall add the foregoing namespace to the registry located at &NAMESPACES;, as described in Section 4 of &xep0053;.</p>
<p>Thanks to Diana Cionoiu, Olivier Crête, Waqas Hussain, Justin Karneges, Steffen Larsen, Yann Leboulanger, Marcus Lundblad, Robert McQueen, Joe Maissel, Glenn Maynard, Ali Sabil, Sjoerd Simons, Will Thompson, Matthew Wild, and Jiří Zárevúcky for their feedback.</p>