CA2005996C - Restriction of communication service accessibility among subscriber communities - Google Patents
Restriction of communication service accessibility among subscriber communitiesInfo
- Publication number
- CA2005996C CA2005996C CA002005996A CA2005996A CA2005996C CA 2005996 C CA2005996 C CA 2005996C CA 002005996 A CA002005996 A CA 002005996A CA 2005996 A CA2005996 A CA 2005996A CA 2005996 C CA2005996 C CA 2005996C
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- user
- communication
- determining
- permitted
- communities
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired - Lifetime
Links
Classifications
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04M—TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION
- H04M3/00—Automatic or semi-automatic exchanges
- H04M3/42—Systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers
- H04M3/50—Centralised arrangements for answering calls; Centralised arrangements for recording messages for absent or busy subscribers ; Centralised arrangements for recording messages
- H04M3/53—Centralised arrangements for recording incoming messages, i.e. mailbox systems
- H04M3/533—Voice mail systems
- H04M3/53325—Interconnection arrangements between voice mail systems
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04M—TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION
- H04M3/00—Automatic or semi-automatic exchanges
- H04M3/42—Systems providing special services or facilities to subscribers
- H04M3/50—Centralised arrangements for answering calls; Centralised arrangements for recording messages for absent or busy subscribers ; Centralised arrangements for recording messages
- H04M3/53—Centralised arrangements for recording incoming messages, i.e. mailbox systems
- H04M3/533—Voice mail systems
-
- H—ELECTRICITY
- H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
- H04M—TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION
- H04M3/00—Automatic or semi-automatic exchanges
- H04M3/38—Graded-service arrangements, i.e. some subscribers prevented from establishing certain connections
Abstract
Subscribers of an electronic mail system service are divided into a plurality of subscriber communities. Subscribers in each community have common rights of access to one or more communication service--the sending and receiving of mail messages--which rights are generally different from those of subscribers in other communities. Permissions to send and receive messages between any two communities are specified on each mail system in a permissions matrix, wherein each row represents a different sender community, each column represents a different recipient community, and the value stored at their intersection indicates the permission vis-a-vis the two communities. A function is invoked on the sender's mail system at message addressing, and on the sender's and recipients' mail systems at message delivery, to enable or prevent message sending or delivery according to the matrix-specified permissions. Optionally, a message-associated permission may be used to overridematrix-specified permissions.
Description
9'~i RESTRICTION OF COMMUNICATION SERVICE
ACCESSIBILITY AMONG SUBSCR~BER COMMUNIIIES
Technical Field This invention relates to e~ tion systems generally, and 5 particularly relates to the allocation of, or restriction of access to, cotnml-nic~tion services among system users.
Back~round of the Invent;on Most c~ lnica~ion systems are versatile in that they provide a variety of seIvices, or capabilities, to their users--not just one service or capability.
10 Even as simple a co~ "~ication system as two transceivers i~llel~;omlected by a wire may be thought of as providing a user connected to one of the transceivers with at least two capabilities: the capability to transmit co.~ ie~tions over the wire, and the capability to receive comm-mic~tinns over the wire.
Often, i~ is desirable to limit access by different users, or different 15 co.~ iPs of users, to di~ subsets of ~e total c~rahiliti~s provided by the system, while allowing those users Ol user co.. ~ ies to share use of the system. For this pulpose, the art has made use of the notion of a "class-of-service". A "class-of-service" is a specific~tion of the cG~ unication-related capabilities that are available to a user. A number of differen$ classes are defined, 20 and different users are S~sci~necl to those different classes.
Summary oi the In~,~..lion We have realized that an unfortunate limitation of the "class-of-service" concept is that the capabilities to which a user is restricted by his or her "class-of-service" are fixed, in the sense that ~hey do not vary depending upon 25 whom the user is co.~ a~ing with. The "class-of-service" concept therefore does not have the flexibility necessaly to easily define, redefine, and implement such flexible rel~ion~hips among ~c...,.l,....is~tion service users as may be desired.
For eY~mrle, in an electronic voice mail service system used by a trucking cu~ y, drivers often leave so many messages for each other that the system 30 became~ ave~lo~ded ancl the ~ d;s~t~e~ cann~t send mf~s~es tc~ the VeiJs, ~t wou~d ll-e~ be desirable to restrict dlivers from sending m~su~s to each other, yet still iallow them to send messages to the dispatcher, and also allow the dispatcher to send messages to the d:nvers. However, such selective message-seindin$ res~ictions ale no~ easily imp1emented ~ia ~e "c~ass-of-service"
35 c~ncept"n large measure because classes of service and col""~ i(ies of interest typically do not share the same boundalies. F~r another example, in an electronic . - . : -X~ 39~
voice-mail service systenl used by a large, hierarchically-structure~, company, lower-ranked personnel often bypass their direct line of m~n~em5nt and send messages to higher-level executives who are either not in their line of m~n~m~nt or many levels above them. ~his tends to i~ with the proper S operation of the org~n;7~tic~nal s~uctule and wastes the executives' time. It would there~ore be desirable to restrict employees to sending messages to their subordinates, peers, and next-level managers, thereby allowing full message-sending capabili~y down the c.,llJvlal~ hierarchy but severely limitin~ ~le message-sending c~r~hility up the corporate hierarchy. Again, such selective 10 message-sending restrictions are not easily implemented via ~he "class-of-service"
concept.
This invention is directed to o~ ;olmllg these and other limitati~ns and disadvantages of the prior art. According to the invention, users of a co~ lt-ic~ion system are ~ n~d to user co.,...,l,nilie~, and co"",.".~ tion 15 permissions--that is, right of access to one or more ~ );c~tion services--are defined f~r each user CO~ u~ y with respect to individual ones of the other usercOl~ ilieS. Permissions are thereby defined between each pair of co~ unities, which p~rrni.~.sions may vary from pair to pair. Illustratively, definitions of the perrnissions are implcmented in a matlix of intersecting rows and columns, :
20 wherein the rows and the columns l~esent the different Cu~ rlili~s and the permissions between any two co.,..~"~niti~s are defined at the intersection of their cclles~)ollding row and column. When a co~.. ~-ication is a~ led between two users, the two user's assigned co.. lll~ s are ~eterminec~, and are in turn used to hetermin~ from the defined p~ s~ion~ whether the allc~ d co.~ ullication is 25 pennitte-l If the co""~ "i~tion is permittefl, it is enabled to proceed; if it is not p~.rmitt~-l, it is prevented from occurring.
By defining separ~te permissions for each pair of co~ iec, the arran~ement characterized above condi~ions a us~r's access to i~ communication seNice on who the user is attempting to co~ ic~te with. A single user may 30 there~ore have different co""",li~ir~ion perrnissions vis-a-vis different other users.
This allows much more flexible tailoring of the use of a co,~l"~ ira~iQn system than has hitherto been easily possible. For example, this arrangement facilita~es implem~nt~t;on of the co~ atir~n res~rictions found desirable in the two examples discusscd in the Background portion of this specification.
- ~' ', .~ ' ' ' ' .
. . ' , ' ~ ,: ,' : ~' 2~g9~
Furthermore, the a~cignm~nt and definition of a user's c~ ahon perrn~ssions may be made hereby in addihon to, and independently ~f, the user's assigned class-of-se~vice. Consequently, this arrangement is ~ully cQmr~ti~le with the concept of class-of-service, and both may be implemented in a single 5 ~x~""l~""i~ ion system without mutual int~rG~ ce.
These and other adYantages and features of the invention will become more a~ from the following description of an illustrative embodiment of the invention considered together with the drawing.
Brief Description of the ~rawin~
FIG. I is a ~lock diagram of an electronic mail service system including an illustrative embodiment of the invention;
F~G. 2 is a block diaglam of pennissions-specifying ~LIu~ c,S t~f the system of FIG. 1 for a first e.~ cn~ of the invention;
FIG. 3 is a flow diagrarn of a permissions-handling function of the 15 system of F~G~ 1, for the first embodiment of the invention;
FIG. 4 is a block diagrarn of permissions-specifying structures additional to those of FIG. 2 ~or a second embocliment of the invention; and FIGS. S and 6 are flow ~ m~ of extensions to the func~ion of FI(~J. 3 for the second embodiment of the in~ention.
20 Detailed Description FM. 1 shows an illustrative co~ u.~ica~ion system. The shown system is a private cc,l~ lul~;cation system, such as might be owned by, and operated to psovide ec~ icat;on selvices on the premises of, a business. lhe system comprises a plurality of user statîons or terminals ll-19--Touch-Tone 25 telephones, for example--interconnected for con~.Junication by a switch 10--such as an AT&T System 75 or 85 PBX. The switch further has tlUllk 2~ connections t~ other col,~ unication systems, such as the public network, to provide terminals 11-19 with col~r,~ icative access to the outside world. Also connectedto switch 10 ase one ~ moIe e~ect~nic mail systems 1-2--the AT&T AUMX
30 voice-mail service systems, for example--which provide the users of terminals 11-19 with electronic mail services. Each mail system 1,2 forrns a subsystem of thecomm-mication system of F~G. l, and differen~ subscliber telmin~31.c 11-19 and their associated subscr~bers 100-1~ are ~ ned ~0 be serviced by different mai~
systems 1-2; for example, t~rmin~ ll-15 and their ~SOCi~t~ subscribers 108, 35 100-101, and 102-103 are assigned to system 1, while t~rrnin~1~ 16-19 and their associated subscribers 106-1û7 and 104-1~5 are ~ ignec1 to system 2. However, ~20(~39~i any subscriber 100-10~ may use any terminal 11-19 or any other terminal to access his or her ~signed mail system 1,2. As described so far, the co~ lunication system oi FIG. 1 i. conventional.
Subscribers 1(10-108 to the c~ .u"ica~ion services of ~e system Gf S FIG. 1 are ~ign~d by a system a~ lalul to di~rc~ subscriber or user co~ unilies, or groups, on the basis of ~eir individual rights, or pe~nissions, to co~ icS~te with fellow subscribers. Members of a co.~ urlily have the same co.. ~ui~ti~-n per~ssions. ~ive such cc"~ ;es 30-34 are shown in ~IG. l;
subscriber 108 belongs to Co~ lulliLy 30, subsc~bers 100-101 belong to 10 col~ u~ y 31, subsclibers 102-103 belong to coln,~uni~y 32, subscribers 106-107 belong to comrnunity 33, and subscnbers 104-105 belong to col...)~ y 34. Any number of subscribels may be ~ssigne~ to a communi~y.
Turning to FIG. 2, each subscri~er 100-108 has a subscriber profile 20,21 stored in the mail system 1-2 to which it is ~cc;~ne,~ A subscriber 15 profile 20,21 is a conventional data structure that provides to mail system 1,2 the inforcnation required by that system ~o service the subscriber. According to thepresent invention, howeve,r, each subscriber profile has been expanded to include an additional entry re~erred to herein as a cu~ y entry 22. Entry 22 specifies the subscriber c~ u~ y 30-34 or group to which the subscriber associated with 20 that profile 20,21 has been assigned.
Similarly to terminals 11-14, each mail system 2 with which a given mail system 1 can communicate has its own system profile 23 stored on the given mail system 1, which profile 23 provides to the given mail system 1 ~e infDnn~tion needed by the given system 1 to co~ ic~te with the other 25 system 2. The other syseems' profiles are ~ikewise eY~ 7d~d to include a co~ n;ly entry ~2 The ~ u~ y ~lat is identified by a system profile 23 ~icllllllullily en~ 22 is in fact a super-co~ y or a default collunu~ y, in thatit encompasses all subscribers of the other system 2 who do not haYe th~ir own subscriber profiles 20,21 in the given system l--irrespective of which collllllulli7ies 30 those subscribers may actually be assigned to on ~heir local system 2. Two such super-cc"""~ iti~s 35,36 are shown in FIG. 1 super-co~ ul-ily 35 is shown as enco~ assing subscribers of system 1 while super-cc,l~ u~ y 36 is shown as enco-np~s;-~g subsc~ibers of system 2.
- Typically, ~SSignTrl~nt of a subscriber to a particula~ cc Illului~ity 30-34 35 is done by an a~ t.~.lol of system 1,2 and the inf~rmauon is entered into thesubscriber's en~y 22 during system 1,2 initi~1i7~ticln~ A typical characteristic of, .. : ,. -~
:, . .
.
, ~, ' ~ '' ~' 9!~
and criterion for ~ nm~nt of a subscriber to, a co~ llulli~y 30-34 is that the subscriber members o~ the same co.~ y 30-34 have the same col~..u~lication permicci~n~ The pPnni~sic)n~ of one co~ ulliiy 30-34 typically are, but need notel~inl from the permissions of another c~ ul2ily 30-34. This is illustrated S by the following exarnples. Example 1: subscribers of c~ "~ -iti~.s 30 and 31 may have permicci~n~ to sendJreceive m~s~es to/from other members of their own cC~ y~ whereas subscli~e~s of ~ UlUllily 32 may not have penn;~sion to co~ ic~te arnong themselves. Example 2: subscribers of cull~llu~ y 30 may have perm~ssions to send messages to subscribers of co~ ies 31, 32, 10 and 33, but may have permissions to receive r~ 5~e~s from subscribers of commllnities 31, 32, and 34. Example 3: subscribels of co~ u~ y 31 may have permissions to send and receive messages to/from cnll",~ y 30; c()-l~llullities 33 and 34 may have permissions to receive messages fiom Cvl~ lullily 30 but not to send messages to ec)l~lllul~i~y 30; CC~Illlllul~ily 34 may have permission~ to send 15 messages to CO~ Y 31 but not to r~ceive messages from c~ ul~ity 31, etc.
As the above examples illustrate, almost any im~in~ble combination of perrnissions may be ~ ned to a Co~ u~ y vis-a-vis its own members or the members of any other co~ lunily; separate p~rmicsi~lnc exist for the two directions of sending m~ss~e.s between any two co.~.. i.i~iÇs, and these 2() permissions need not be symmetrical; and the perrnissions between any two groups need not even be consistent between systems 1,2 (i.e., that a first collllmullity has permission to send messages to a second colllnlu~ y in one system 1 does not n~cess~rily mean that the filst oo ~ Ul~i~y has pennission to send messages to the second c~lK~ ity in another system 2).
The subsc~iber coll""l")i~i~s' pçrmiscions are l~ csellted on each system 1,2 by a pennisgiong matrix 40. Each system 1,2 stores its own matrix 40.Rows 41 of each matnx 40 each Iepresent a different collllllullily 30-34 or super-collllllu~ y 35-36 that can be identified by entries 22 on that system 1,2.
Columns 42 of each matrix 40 do the same. Each co..... l~n;~y served by another 30 system 1,2 is identified in rows 41 and columns 42 of ma~rix 40 of a local system ~,2 in the s~21e manner as the cc"~ ies of the 20ca2 system are identified therein. Rows 41 illustratively represent co...~ ;l;çs 30-34 and super-cv~ içs 35-36 in their role as mail senders, and cc>lumns 42 illustratively represent co-....~ ies 30-34 and super-co--,,,~ ies 35-36 in their role as mail 35 receivers. A "zero" or "one" value stored at the intersec~ion 43 of any row 41 and any column 42 identifies the permi~sion for the co~ u~ y or super-coll~l~uni~y ~ - . .
;,, :~ . "
35~
represented by the ~ow to send mail to the co~ .ui~ity or super-col~ nity represented by the column, and for the c.~ .iiy or super-c~ unily represented by the column tO r~ceive that mail. For example, a "one" stored at the intelsection of a IOW 41 and a column 42 both of which le~selll coL~~ y 30 S would indicate that subscri~ers of co~ u~iily 30 can send mail to and receive mail from each otheT, while a "zero" stored at that i~ e~;lion would indicate tha subscribers of co~ lullily 30 cannot c~""ll~"iç~te among themselves through the mail system. A "one" stored at the il,t~ ccLions of both a row 41 ~epresenting ~o~Ll~unlty 30 and a column 42 leplesenli-~g co~l~nu~ily 32, and a r~w 41 represeDting c~ nu~ y 32 and a column 42 representing co~ llu~ y 3û would indicate that the two co",l".~ s can both send mail to and receive ma-il from each other, whereas a "zero" stored at those intersections would indicate that the two co"~."~ ie.s 30 and 32 cannot co"~n"nicat~ with each other through the mail system. And a "one" stored at the intersection of a row 41 repr~senting coll~l.unity 31 and a colutnn 42l~.Gse~ g coll~ nity 32 along vrith a "zero"
stored at the in~ e.ilion of a row 41 lepresenting C~ lulliLy 32 and a column 42representing co"l""~ y 31 would indicate that col~ nity 31 can send mail to collmlullity 32 and coll~ u~ y 32 can receive that mail, but that community 32 cannot send mail to col~l,u~ y 31.
In operation, systems 1 and 2 use colllll.llllily entries 22 of profiles 20, 21, 23 and matrices 40 in the manner shown in FIG. 3.
A user of a te~ninal 11-19 establishes a connection through switch 10 to system 1 or 2to whichi$is assigned in a con~ention~ manner, and obtains mail se~vices ~ fi~ in a conventional manner. However, when the user seeks 25 to send mail to another one or more users and specifies those recipients to system 1 or 2 (i.e., addresses the message), system 1 or 2 invokes function 50, at step 300, to execute in system I or 2.
Upon invocation at step 300 of FIG. 3, function 50 receives the identity--illustratively the name andlor the electronic address--of the sender and of 30 the one or more recipients of the electronic mail, at step 301. Illus~atively, this info~ma~ion is forw;~ded ts> function 50 upon its invocation, or functiorl 50 retrieves the il~r(~ n from a preA~t~rrnin~d place in memory of system 1 or 2.
Recipients may be desi~n:~ted by the name of a list of recipients.
Function 50 ~eats each re ipient specified by the list as a separate individual 35 recipient.
" ~ ' .
.
, . , . . - -, Z~;30~99~i Having received the identity of the recipients at step 301, function S0 then selects a first one of the one or more recipients, at step 302, and retrieves the sender's and the selected recipient's w~ nily I.D.'s from co~ lunily entries 22 of their respective subscnber profiles 20, 21, or--if the recipient is on a remote 5 system and does not have a subscriber profile on ~he local system--system profile 23, at step 303, Function 50 then uses the sender's co~ ulliLy I.D. as apointer to identify and select the sender's associated one of the rows 41 of permissions matrix 40, at step 304, and uses the recipient's co~ luni~y I~O. as a pointer to identif~r and select the recipient's associated one of the columns 42 of 10 permi~sions matrix 40, at step 305. Function S0 then accesses the permission ~alue stored in matrix 40 at the intersection of the selected row 41 and column 42, at step 306, to determ~ne whether the value is a "zero" or a "one", at step 307.If the value is a "zero", penni~;on is denied to co~ unicate the mail message to the intended recipient, and function S0 notifies the sender thereof, at lS step 3Q9. Illustratively, function 50 causes a pre-recorded announcement to be played back to the sender. If the pelmissions value is detern~ined to be "one" at step 307, pennission is granted to co~ llica~ ~e message to the intended recipient, and function 50 causes conventional message delivery functions to be pt;~ Iled, at step 308. Illustratively, function S0 invokes a conventional 20 message-scheduling function to be invoked.
Following step 308 or 309, function 50 checks whether there are more recipients to process, at step 310. If all recipients have been processed, function 50 retums to the point in mail system operation from whence it was invoked, at step 313. If all recipients have not been processed, function S0 selects the next 25 recipient for processing, at step 311, retrieves the selected lecipient's community I.D. from co.-~,n~.ity ent~y 22 of the rscipient's subscriber profile 20, 21, or--if the recipient is on a remote system and does not have a subscriber profile on the local system--system profile 23, at step 312, and then returns to step 304.
As was mentioned ~n conjunction with st~ps 3~ and 309, invocation 30 of function 50 at the mail-message addressing stage results in the message being scheduled for delivery to the recipient if yr~per permissions exist. But there may be a si~nific~n~ time delay between the scheduling of a message for delivery andthe time of delivery itself, during which time p.,ll~lis~ions may change. Also, delivery may talse place on a remote system 1,2 whose permissions are different 35 from the p~ iC)nc of the sender's local system. Therefore, func~ion S0 is also invoked at ste~ 300 on the sender's local system 1 or 2 and on each recip;ent's ;: .:. . : ..:
- . ;. . i . : :
: .. ., ;,: - .. ..
, : , : :
Z~ 3~
local system 1 or 2 at the time of delivery of the mail message. At ~his time, pelro~ ance of step 308 involves the actual delivery of the mail message into the recipient's mailbox~ On the other hand, p~lÇ~ dl3ce c>f step 309 at the ~imc of message deli~ry involves sending to the sender's 1Ocal system 1 or 2 and placing5 in the sender's m~ulbox a message in~lic~ting that the message could not be delivered to the recipient 'oecause of denied pe~nissions.
As an extension of the above feature, a pem~ission may furlher be associated with a mail message i~self, which overrides the permi~sionc associated with the sender-recipient subscriber pair's co.-~".~ ;es in matrix 40. This 10 p~rmi~Si~,n is in~lic~ted by a new perrnission field 410 of the conYentional message header 400 of the message, as shown in PIG. 4. The permission that is associatedwith the message is context-dependent: its value is dete~mined by the status of the message sender at the time that he or she is sending the message. For example, in a mail system 1 or 2 that allows a conventional guest-host 15 re~ationship to exist between certain users, guests and host can always send mess~es to each other, regardless of the permission values specified by perrnissions matrix 40. In such a system, messages sent either by a sender having the sta~us of a guest user, or by a user having the statas of a host with respect to the recipient, may automatically have a perrnicsion value of "one" associated 20 therewith in pernission field 410, which value o~e~ndes any Ielevant ma~ix 40 permissions and causes the message to be delivered to the recipient unconditionally. On the other hand, messages sent by other senders may ~ntom~ti~lly have a pprmi~siQn value of "zero" associated therewith in permission field 410, which value indicates that permissions specified by matrix 40 control25 the sending and delivery of the associated message.
In the implem~ntaticn where rnail messages have associated permissions, the permissions-processing function shown in FIG. 3 is expanded in the manner shown in FIGS. 5 and 6.
When the sender addresses the mail message, system I or 2 invokes 30 function 50 not at st~p 300, but at step 290 of E~IG. 5. Upon invocation, func~ion 50 checks whe~her the sender is a guest or whether any recipients are guests of the sender, at step 291. Host and guests sha~e a subscriber profile 20,21 so the cheek is pelr~ ed by de~c~ ing whether the sender and any of the recipientg have the same one subscriber profile 20,21. If so, function 50 sets 3S permi~ion field 410 of the message's header 400 to a "one" to indicate that ehis message is to be delivered unconditionally, at step 292. Function 50 then .
.. ~ . . , '; ' -:
.,, ' ' ;~
, ~
, ~ :
ZOO~i9"3~:, continues with conventional message delivery activities, at step 293. These activities are those described for step 308 of FIG. 3. Thereafter, function 50 merely returns to the point of its invocation, at step 294 If it is det~rm;n~d at step 291 ~at neither the sender nor any of the 5 recipients have the status of guests, function ~0 clears permission field 410 of message header 400 to indicate that sending and delivery of this message are conditioned by relevant perrni~ions in matrices 40, at step 295. Function 50 then continues operation with the activities shown in FIG. 3.
As was mentioned previously, function 50 is invoked again at the time 10 of delivery of the mail message, on the sender's local system 1 or 2 and on each recipient's local system 1 or 2. This time, however, function 50 is invol~ed at step 280 of FIG. 6, not at step 290 of FIG. 5.
Upon its invocation at step 280, function 50 retriev~s ~he permission value stored in permission field 410 of the message's header 400, at step 281, and 15 checks it tO determ~ne if it is set to "one" to indicate override of ma~rix 40 permissions, at step 2~2. If so, function 50 continues with conventional messagedelivery activities, at step 283. These activities are thos~ described for step 308 of FIG. 3. Thereafter, function 50 merely returns to the point of its invocation, at step 284.
If it is d~termined at step 282 that the message-associated permission is not set to override mat~x 40 permissions, function 50 continues operation with the ac~ivities shown in FIG. 3.
Of course, various changes and modifications to the illustrative embodiment described above will be apparent to those skilled in the art. For 25 example, the sender and recipient need not be human users of an electronic mail system, but may be any other conceivable entities--co~ u~licating processes executing in a com~uler, for example. Or, permi~sions need not be specified ~ia a ma~ix format; any suitable format may be used--tabular folm2t, for example.
~urthelmvre, when pem~issions to services in addition to the sending and 30 receiving of rnessages need be specified, a plu~ality of ma~nces may be used t~
specify those pelmissions, one per each selvice. This plurality of mat~ices may be either a plurality of physically-distinct m~rices, or a plurality of logical matrices r~presented by a plurality of values a~ e~h row and column intersection of a single physical mat~ix. Also, all subscriber co"",l~ ities served by a remote 35 system may automatically be trea~ed as a single super-community on a local system. Such changes and modifications can be made without departing from the - .~ -z~ 9~ :
spirit and the scope of the invention and without ~limini~hing its attendant advantages. It is therefore intended that such changes and modifications be covcred by the fo]lowing claims.
, . . . . . .
, ~ , .. , : . , :
': ,' , : ., ', ' ' ~' '' ' ' ' ' i'.,, ' , ' ~ .' ' '' '
ACCESSIBILITY AMONG SUBSCR~BER COMMUNIIIES
Technical Field This invention relates to e~ tion systems generally, and 5 particularly relates to the allocation of, or restriction of access to, cotnml-nic~tion services among system users.
Back~round of the Invent;on Most c~ lnica~ion systems are versatile in that they provide a variety of seIvices, or capabilities, to their users--not just one service or capability.
10 Even as simple a co~ "~ication system as two transceivers i~llel~;omlected by a wire may be thought of as providing a user connected to one of the transceivers with at least two capabilities: the capability to transmit co.~ ie~tions over the wire, and the capability to receive comm-mic~tinns over the wire.
Often, i~ is desirable to limit access by different users, or different 15 co.~ iPs of users, to di~ subsets of ~e total c~rahiliti~s provided by the system, while allowing those users Ol user co.. ~ ies to share use of the system. For this pulpose, the art has made use of the notion of a "class-of-service". A "class-of-service" is a specific~tion of the cG~ unication-related capabilities that are available to a user. A number of differen$ classes are defined, 20 and different users are S~sci~necl to those different classes.
Summary oi the In~,~..lion We have realized that an unfortunate limitation of the "class-of-service" concept is that the capabilities to which a user is restricted by his or her "class-of-service" are fixed, in the sense that ~hey do not vary depending upon 25 whom the user is co.~ a~ing with. The "class-of-service" concept therefore does not have the flexibility necessaly to easily define, redefine, and implement such flexible rel~ion~hips among ~c...,.l,....is~tion service users as may be desired.
For eY~mrle, in an electronic voice mail service system used by a trucking cu~ y, drivers often leave so many messages for each other that the system 30 became~ ave~lo~ded ancl the ~ d;s~t~e~ cann~t send mf~s~es tc~ the VeiJs, ~t wou~d ll-e~ be desirable to restrict dlivers from sending m~su~s to each other, yet still iallow them to send messages to the dispatcher, and also allow the dispatcher to send messages to the d:nvers. However, such selective message-seindin$ res~ictions ale no~ easily imp1emented ~ia ~e "c~ass-of-service"
35 c~ncept"n large measure because classes of service and col""~ i(ies of interest typically do not share the same boundalies. F~r another example, in an electronic . - . : -X~ 39~
voice-mail service systenl used by a large, hierarchically-structure~, company, lower-ranked personnel often bypass their direct line of m~n~em5nt and send messages to higher-level executives who are either not in their line of m~n~m~nt or many levels above them. ~his tends to i~ with the proper S operation of the org~n;7~tic~nal s~uctule and wastes the executives' time. It would there~ore be desirable to restrict employees to sending messages to their subordinates, peers, and next-level managers, thereby allowing full message-sending capabili~y down the c.,llJvlal~ hierarchy but severely limitin~ ~le message-sending c~r~hility up the corporate hierarchy. Again, such selective 10 message-sending restrictions are not easily implemented via ~he "class-of-service"
concept.
This invention is directed to o~ ;olmllg these and other limitati~ns and disadvantages of the prior art. According to the invention, users of a co~ lt-ic~ion system are ~ n~d to user co.,...,l,nilie~, and co"",.".~ tion 15 permissions--that is, right of access to one or more ~ );c~tion services--are defined f~r each user CO~ u~ y with respect to individual ones of the other usercOl~ ilieS. Permissions are thereby defined between each pair of co~ unities, which p~rrni.~.sions may vary from pair to pair. Illustratively, definitions of the perrnissions are implcmented in a matlix of intersecting rows and columns, :
20 wherein the rows and the columns l~esent the different Cu~ rlili~s and the permissions between any two co.,..~"~niti~s are defined at the intersection of their cclles~)ollding row and column. When a co~.. ~-ication is a~ led between two users, the two user's assigned co.. lll~ s are ~eterminec~, and are in turn used to hetermin~ from the defined p~ s~ion~ whether the allc~ d co.~ ullication is 25 pennitte-l If the co""~ "i~tion is permittefl, it is enabled to proceed; if it is not p~.rmitt~-l, it is prevented from occurring.
By defining separ~te permissions for each pair of co~ iec, the arran~ement characterized above condi~ions a us~r's access to i~ communication seNice on who the user is attempting to co~ ic~te with. A single user may 30 there~ore have different co""",li~ir~ion perrnissions vis-a-vis different other users.
This allows much more flexible tailoring of the use of a co,~l"~ ira~iQn system than has hitherto been easily possible. For example, this arrangement facilita~es implem~nt~t;on of the co~ atir~n res~rictions found desirable in the two examples discusscd in the Background portion of this specification.
- ~' ', .~ ' ' ' ' .
. . ' , ' ~ ,: ,' : ~' 2~g9~
Furthermore, the a~cignm~nt and definition of a user's c~ ahon perrn~ssions may be made hereby in addihon to, and independently ~f, the user's assigned class-of-se~vice. Consequently, this arrangement is ~ully cQmr~ti~le with the concept of class-of-service, and both may be implemented in a single 5 ~x~""l~""i~ ion system without mutual int~rG~ ce.
These and other adYantages and features of the invention will become more a~ from the following description of an illustrative embodiment of the invention considered together with the drawing.
Brief Description of the ~rawin~
FIG. I is a ~lock diagram of an electronic mail service system including an illustrative embodiment of the invention;
F~G. 2 is a block diaglam of pennissions-specifying ~LIu~ c,S t~f the system of FIG. 1 for a first e.~ cn~ of the invention;
FIG. 3 is a flow diagrarn of a permissions-handling function of the 15 system of F~G~ 1, for the first embodiment of the invention;
FIG. 4 is a block diagrarn of permissions-specifying structures additional to those of FIG. 2 ~or a second embocliment of the invention; and FIGS. S and 6 are flow ~ m~ of extensions to the func~ion of FI(~J. 3 for the second embodiment of the in~ention.
20 Detailed Description FM. 1 shows an illustrative co~ u.~ica~ion system. The shown system is a private cc,l~ lul~;cation system, such as might be owned by, and operated to psovide ec~ icat;on selvices on the premises of, a business. lhe system comprises a plurality of user statîons or terminals ll-19--Touch-Tone 25 telephones, for example--interconnected for con~.Junication by a switch 10--such as an AT&T System 75 or 85 PBX. The switch further has tlUllk 2~ connections t~ other col,~ unication systems, such as the public network, to provide terminals 11-19 with col~r,~ icative access to the outside world. Also connectedto switch 10 ase one ~ moIe e~ect~nic mail systems 1-2--the AT&T AUMX
30 voice-mail service systems, for example--which provide the users of terminals 11-19 with electronic mail services. Each mail system 1,2 forrns a subsystem of thecomm-mication system of F~G. l, and differen~ subscliber telmin~31.c 11-19 and their associated subscr~bers 100-1~ are ~ ned ~0 be serviced by different mai~
systems 1-2; for example, t~rmin~ ll-15 and their ~SOCi~t~ subscribers 108, 35 100-101, and 102-103 are assigned to system 1, while t~rrnin~1~ 16-19 and their associated subscribers 106-1û7 and 104-1~5 are ~ ignec1 to system 2. However, ~20(~39~i any subscriber 100-10~ may use any terminal 11-19 or any other terminal to access his or her ~signed mail system 1,2. As described so far, the co~ lunication system oi FIG. 1 i. conventional.
Subscribers 1(10-108 to the c~ .u"ica~ion services of ~e system Gf S FIG. 1 are ~ign~d by a system a~ lalul to di~rc~ subscriber or user co~ unilies, or groups, on the basis of ~eir individual rights, or pe~nissions, to co~ icS~te with fellow subscribers. Members of a co.~ urlily have the same co.. ~ui~ti~-n per~ssions. ~ive such cc"~ ;es 30-34 are shown in ~IG. l;
subscriber 108 belongs to Co~ lulliLy 30, subsc~bers 100-101 belong to 10 col~ u~ y 31, subsclibers 102-103 belong to coln,~uni~y 32, subscribers 106-107 belong to comrnunity 33, and subscnbers 104-105 belong to col...)~ y 34. Any number of subscribels may be ~ssigne~ to a communi~y.
Turning to FIG. 2, each subscri~er 100-108 has a subscriber profile 20,21 stored in the mail system 1-2 to which it is ~cc;~ne,~ A subscriber 15 profile 20,21 is a conventional data structure that provides to mail system 1,2 the inforcnation required by that system ~o service the subscriber. According to thepresent invention, howeve,r, each subscriber profile has been expanded to include an additional entry re~erred to herein as a cu~ y entry 22. Entry 22 specifies the subscriber c~ u~ y 30-34 or group to which the subscriber associated with 20 that profile 20,21 has been assigned.
Similarly to terminals 11-14, each mail system 2 with which a given mail system 1 can communicate has its own system profile 23 stored on the given mail system 1, which profile 23 provides to the given mail system 1 ~e infDnn~tion needed by the given system 1 to co~ ic~te with the other 25 system 2. The other syseems' profiles are ~ikewise eY~ 7d~d to include a co~ n;ly entry ~2 The ~ u~ y ~lat is identified by a system profile 23 ~icllllllullily en~ 22 is in fact a super-co~ y or a default collunu~ y, in thatit encompasses all subscribers of the other system 2 who do not haYe th~ir own subscriber profiles 20,21 in the given system l--irrespective of which collllllulli7ies 30 those subscribers may actually be assigned to on ~heir local system 2. Two such super-cc"""~ iti~s 35,36 are shown in FIG. 1 super-co~ ul-ily 35 is shown as enco~ assing subscribers of system 1 while super-cc,l~ u~ y 36 is shown as enco-np~s;-~g subsc~ibers of system 2.
- Typically, ~SSignTrl~nt of a subscriber to a particula~ cc Illului~ity 30-34 35 is done by an a~ t.~.lol of system 1,2 and the inf~rmauon is entered into thesubscriber's en~y 22 during system 1,2 initi~1i7~ticln~ A typical characteristic of, .. : ,. -~
:, . .
.
, ~, ' ~ '' ~' 9!~
and criterion for ~ nm~nt of a subscriber to, a co~ llulli~y 30-34 is that the subscriber members o~ the same co.~ y 30-34 have the same col~..u~lication permicci~n~ The pPnni~sic)n~ of one co~ ulliiy 30-34 typically are, but need notel~inl from the permissions of another c~ ul2ily 30-34. This is illustrated S by the following exarnples. Example 1: subscribers of c~ "~ -iti~.s 30 and 31 may have permicci~n~ to sendJreceive m~s~es to/from other members of their own cC~ y~ whereas subscli~e~s of ~ UlUllily 32 may not have penn;~sion to co~ ic~te arnong themselves. Example 2: subscribers of cull~llu~ y 30 may have perm~ssions to send messages to subscribers of co~ ies 31, 32, 10 and 33, but may have permissions to receive r~ 5~e~s from subscribers of commllnities 31, 32, and 34. Example 3: subscribels of co~ u~ y 31 may have permissions to send and receive messages to/from cnll",~ y 30; c()-l~llullities 33 and 34 may have permissions to receive messages fiom Cvl~ lullily 30 but not to send messages to ec)l~lllul~i~y 30; CC~Illlllul~ily 34 may have permission~ to send 15 messages to CO~ Y 31 but not to r~ceive messages from c~ ul~ity 31, etc.
As the above examples illustrate, almost any im~in~ble combination of perrnissions may be ~ ned to a Co~ u~ y vis-a-vis its own members or the members of any other co~ lunily; separate p~rmicsi~lnc exist for the two directions of sending m~ss~e.s between any two co.~.. i.i~iÇs, and these 2() permissions need not be symmetrical; and the perrnissions between any two groups need not even be consistent between systems 1,2 (i.e., that a first collllmullity has permission to send messages to a second colllnlu~ y in one system 1 does not n~cess~rily mean that the filst oo ~ Ul~i~y has pennission to send messages to the second c~lK~ ity in another system 2).
The subsc~iber coll""l")i~i~s' pçrmiscions are l~ csellted on each system 1,2 by a pennisgiong matrix 40. Each system 1,2 stores its own matrix 40.Rows 41 of each matnx 40 each Iepresent a different collllllullily 30-34 or super-collllllu~ y 35-36 that can be identified by entries 22 on that system 1,2.
Columns 42 of each matrix 40 do the same. Each co..... l~n;~y served by another 30 system 1,2 is identified in rows 41 and columns 42 of ma~rix 40 of a local system ~,2 in the s~21e manner as the cc"~ ies of the 20ca2 system are identified therein. Rows 41 illustratively represent co...~ ;l;çs 30-34 and super-cv~ içs 35-36 in their role as mail senders, and cc>lumns 42 illustratively represent co-....~ ies 30-34 and super-co--,,,~ ies 35-36 in their role as mail 35 receivers. A "zero" or "one" value stored at the intersec~ion 43 of any row 41 and any column 42 identifies the permi~sion for the co~ u~ y or super-coll~l~uni~y ~ - . .
;,, :~ . "
35~
represented by the ~ow to send mail to the co~ .ui~ity or super-col~ nity represented by the column, and for the c.~ .iiy or super-c~ unily represented by the column tO r~ceive that mail. For example, a "one" stored at the intelsection of a IOW 41 and a column 42 both of which le~selll coL~~ y 30 S would indicate that subscri~ers of co~ u~iily 30 can send mail to and receive mail from each otheT, while a "zero" stored at that i~ e~;lion would indicate tha subscribers of co~ lullily 30 cannot c~""ll~"iç~te among themselves through the mail system. A "one" stored at the il,t~ ccLions of both a row 41 ~epresenting ~o~Ll~unlty 30 and a column 42 leplesenli-~g co~l~nu~ily 32, and a r~w 41 represeDting c~ nu~ y 32 and a column 42 representing co~ llu~ y 3û would indicate that the two co",l".~ s can both send mail to and receive ma-il from each other, whereas a "zero" stored at those intersections would indicate that the two co"~."~ ie.s 30 and 32 cannot co"~n"nicat~ with each other through the mail system. And a "one" stored at the intersection of a row 41 repr~senting coll~l.unity 31 and a colutnn 42l~.Gse~ g coll~ nity 32 along vrith a "zero"
stored at the in~ e.ilion of a row 41 lepresenting C~ lulliLy 32 and a column 42representing co"l""~ y 31 would indicate that col~ nity 31 can send mail to collmlullity 32 and coll~ u~ y 32 can receive that mail, but that community 32 cannot send mail to col~l,u~ y 31.
In operation, systems 1 and 2 use colllll.llllily entries 22 of profiles 20, 21, 23 and matrices 40 in the manner shown in FIG. 3.
A user of a te~ninal 11-19 establishes a connection through switch 10 to system 1 or 2to whichi$is assigned in a con~ention~ manner, and obtains mail se~vices ~ fi~ in a conventional manner. However, when the user seeks 25 to send mail to another one or more users and specifies those recipients to system 1 or 2 (i.e., addresses the message), system 1 or 2 invokes function 50, at step 300, to execute in system I or 2.
Upon invocation at step 300 of FIG. 3, function 50 receives the identity--illustratively the name andlor the electronic address--of the sender and of 30 the one or more recipients of the electronic mail, at step 301. Illus~atively, this info~ma~ion is forw;~ded ts> function 50 upon its invocation, or functiorl 50 retrieves the il~r(~ n from a preA~t~rrnin~d place in memory of system 1 or 2.
Recipients may be desi~n:~ted by the name of a list of recipients.
Function 50 ~eats each re ipient specified by the list as a separate individual 35 recipient.
" ~ ' .
.
, . , . . - -, Z~;30~99~i Having received the identity of the recipients at step 301, function S0 then selects a first one of the one or more recipients, at step 302, and retrieves the sender's and the selected recipient's w~ nily I.D.'s from co~ lunily entries 22 of their respective subscnber profiles 20, 21, or--if the recipient is on a remote 5 system and does not have a subscriber profile on ~he local system--system profile 23, at step 303, Function 50 then uses the sender's co~ ulliLy I.D. as apointer to identify and select the sender's associated one of the rows 41 of permissions matrix 40, at step 304, and uses the recipient's co~ luni~y I~O. as a pointer to identif~r and select the recipient's associated one of the columns 42 of 10 permi~sions matrix 40, at step 305. Function S0 then accesses the permission ~alue stored in matrix 40 at the intersection of the selected row 41 and column 42, at step 306, to determ~ne whether the value is a "zero" or a "one", at step 307.If the value is a "zero", penni~;on is denied to co~ unicate the mail message to the intended recipient, and function S0 notifies the sender thereof, at lS step 3Q9. Illustratively, function 50 causes a pre-recorded announcement to be played back to the sender. If the pelmissions value is detern~ined to be "one" at step 307, pennission is granted to co~ llica~ ~e message to the intended recipient, and function 50 causes conventional message delivery functions to be pt;~ Iled, at step 308. Illustratively, function S0 invokes a conventional 20 message-scheduling function to be invoked.
Following step 308 or 309, function 50 checks whether there are more recipients to process, at step 310. If all recipients have been processed, function 50 retums to the point in mail system operation from whence it was invoked, at step 313. If all recipients have not been processed, function S0 selects the next 25 recipient for processing, at step 311, retrieves the selected lecipient's community I.D. from co.-~,n~.ity ent~y 22 of the rscipient's subscriber profile 20, 21, or--if the recipient is on a remote system and does not have a subscriber profile on the local system--system profile 23, at step 312, and then returns to step 304.
As was mentioned ~n conjunction with st~ps 3~ and 309, invocation 30 of function 50 at the mail-message addressing stage results in the message being scheduled for delivery to the recipient if yr~per permissions exist. But there may be a si~nific~n~ time delay between the scheduling of a message for delivery andthe time of delivery itself, during which time p.,ll~lis~ions may change. Also, delivery may talse place on a remote system 1,2 whose permissions are different 35 from the p~ iC)nc of the sender's local system. Therefore, func~ion S0 is also invoked at ste~ 300 on the sender's local system 1 or 2 and on each recip;ent's ;: .:. . : ..:
- . ;. . i . : :
: .. ., ;,: - .. ..
, : , : :
Z~ 3~
local system 1 or 2 at the time of delivery of the mail message. At ~his time, pelro~ ance of step 308 involves the actual delivery of the mail message into the recipient's mailbox~ On the other hand, p~lÇ~ dl3ce c>f step 309 at the ~imc of message deli~ry involves sending to the sender's 1Ocal system 1 or 2 and placing5 in the sender's m~ulbox a message in~lic~ting that the message could not be delivered to the recipient 'oecause of denied pe~nissions.
As an extension of the above feature, a pem~ission may furlher be associated with a mail message i~self, which overrides the permi~sionc associated with the sender-recipient subscriber pair's co.-~".~ ;es in matrix 40. This 10 p~rmi~Si~,n is in~lic~ted by a new perrnission field 410 of the conYentional message header 400 of the message, as shown in PIG. 4. The permission that is associatedwith the message is context-dependent: its value is dete~mined by the status of the message sender at the time that he or she is sending the message. For example, in a mail system 1 or 2 that allows a conventional guest-host 15 re~ationship to exist between certain users, guests and host can always send mess~es to each other, regardless of the permission values specified by perrnissions matrix 40. In such a system, messages sent either by a sender having the sta~us of a guest user, or by a user having the statas of a host with respect to the recipient, may automatically have a perrnicsion value of "one" associated 20 therewith in pernission field 410, which value o~e~ndes any Ielevant ma~ix 40 permissions and causes the message to be delivered to the recipient unconditionally. On the other hand, messages sent by other senders may ~ntom~ti~lly have a pprmi~siQn value of "zero" associated therewith in permission field 410, which value indicates that permissions specified by matrix 40 control25 the sending and delivery of the associated message.
In the implem~ntaticn where rnail messages have associated permissions, the permissions-processing function shown in FIG. 3 is expanded in the manner shown in FIGS. 5 and 6.
When the sender addresses the mail message, system I or 2 invokes 30 function 50 not at st~p 300, but at step 290 of E~IG. 5. Upon invocation, func~ion 50 checks whe~her the sender is a guest or whether any recipients are guests of the sender, at step 291. Host and guests sha~e a subscriber profile 20,21 so the cheek is pelr~ ed by de~c~ ing whether the sender and any of the recipientg have the same one subscriber profile 20,21. If so, function 50 sets 3S permi~ion field 410 of the message's header 400 to a "one" to indicate that ehis message is to be delivered unconditionally, at step 292. Function 50 then .
.. ~ . . , '; ' -:
.,, ' ' ;~
, ~
, ~ :
ZOO~i9"3~:, continues with conventional message delivery activities, at step 293. These activities are those described for step 308 of FIG. 3. Thereafter, function 50 merely returns to the point of its invocation, at step 294 If it is det~rm;n~d at step 291 ~at neither the sender nor any of the 5 recipients have the status of guests, function ~0 clears permission field 410 of message header 400 to indicate that sending and delivery of this message are conditioned by relevant perrni~ions in matrices 40, at step 295. Function 50 then continues operation with the activities shown in FIG. 3.
As was mentioned previously, function 50 is invoked again at the time 10 of delivery of the mail message, on the sender's local system 1 or 2 and on each recipient's local system 1 or 2. This time, however, function 50 is invol~ed at step 280 of FIG. 6, not at step 290 of FIG. 5.
Upon its invocation at step 280, function 50 retriev~s ~he permission value stored in permission field 410 of the message's header 400, at step 281, and 15 checks it tO determ~ne if it is set to "one" to indicate override of ma~rix 40 permissions, at step 2~2. If so, function 50 continues with conventional messagedelivery activities, at step 283. These activities are thos~ described for step 308 of FIG. 3. Thereafter, function 50 merely returns to the point of its invocation, at step 284.
If it is d~termined at step 282 that the message-associated permission is not set to override mat~x 40 permissions, function 50 continues operation with the ac~ivities shown in FIG. 3.
Of course, various changes and modifications to the illustrative embodiment described above will be apparent to those skilled in the art. For 25 example, the sender and recipient need not be human users of an electronic mail system, but may be any other conceivable entities--co~ u~licating processes executing in a com~uler, for example. Or, permi~sions need not be specified ~ia a ma~ix format; any suitable format may be used--tabular folm2t, for example.
~urthelmvre, when pem~issions to services in addition to the sending and 30 receiving of rnessages need be specified, a plu~ality of ma~nces may be used t~
specify those pelmissions, one per each selvice. This plurality of mat~ices may be either a plurality of physically-distinct m~rices, or a plurality of logical matrices r~presented by a plurality of values a~ e~h row and column intersection of a single physical mat~ix. Also, all subscriber co"",l~ ities served by a remote 35 system may automatically be trea~ed as a single super-community on a local system. Such changes and modifications can be made without departing from the - .~ -z~ 9~ :
spirit and the scope of the invention and without ~limini~hing its attendant advantages. It is therefore intended that such changes and modifications be covcred by the fo]lowing claims.
, . . . . . .
, ~ , .. , : . , :
': ,' , : ., ', ' ' ~' '' ' ' ' ' i'.,, ' , ' ~ .' ' '' '
Claims (23)
1. An arrangement comprising:
first means for assigning users of a communication system to ones of a plurality of user communities;
second means for defining, for each user community, communication permissions with respect to individual ones of the other user communities;
third means responsive to an attempted communication between two users for identifying the two users and determining the two identified users' assigned communities;
fourth means responsive to the determination of the two users' assigned communities for determining from the second means whether the attempted communication is permitted; and fifth means responsive to a determination that the attempted communication is permitted for enabling the communication, and further responsive to a determination that the attempted communication is not permitted for preventing the communication.
first means for assigning users of a communication system to ones of a plurality of user communities;
second means for defining, for each user community, communication permissions with respect to individual ones of the other user communities;
third means responsive to an attempted communication between two users for identifying the two users and determining the two identified users' assigned communities;
fourth means responsive to the determination of the two users' assigned communities for determining from the second means whether the attempted communication is permitted; and fifth means responsive to a determination that the attempted communication is permitted for enabling the communication, and further responsive to a determination that the attempted communication is not permitted for preventing the communication.
2. The arrangement of claim 1 wherein the first means comprise a plurality of means, one associated with each user, for assigning each user to a community of the plurality of user communities.
3. The arrangement of claim 1 wherein the second means comprise means for defining the communication permissions for each pair of the user communities.
4. The arrangement of claim 2 wherein the third means comprise means responsive to an attempt by a first user to communicate with a second user for determining from the first and the second user's assigning means the first and the second user's assigned communities.
5. The arrangement of claim 1 wherein the fourth means comprise means for determining from the second means whether the attempted communication is permitted between the two user's assigned communities.
6. The arrangement of claim 2 wherein each assigning means comprise a community entry of a user's subscriber profile.
7. The arrangement of claim 1 wherein the second means comprise at least one matrix each comprising a plurality of intersecting rows and columns, each row of a matrix corresponding to a different community and each column of a matrix corresponding to a different community, each row and each column of a matrix defining a permission at their intersection.
8. The arrangement of claim 7 wherein the at least one matrix comprises a plurality of matrices each defining permissions for a different one of a plurality of types of communications.
9. The arrangement of claim 7 wherein each row of a matrix corresponds to one of a communication sender and receiver community, and wherein each column of a matrix corresponds to the otherof a communication sender and receiver community.
10. The arrangement of claim 1 further comprising sixth means for specifying an overriding permission for an attempted communication, and seventh means responsive to an overriding permission having been specified for the attempted communication by the sixth means, for enabling the communication irrespective of the permissions defined by the second means; and wherein the fifth means are responsive to both (a) an overriding permission not having been specified for the attempted communication and (b) a determination bythe fourth means that the attempted communication is not permitted, for preventing the communication.
11. The arrangement of claim 1 wherein the fourth means comprise means for determining whether the attempted communication is permitted, at (a) time of initiation of the attempted communication, and at (b) time of completion of the attempted communication, in response to having determined at the time of initiation that the attempted communication is permitted.
12. The arrangement of claim 5 wherein the third means comprise means for determining the two user's assigned communities, at (a) time of initiation of the attempted communication, and (b) time of completion of the attempted communication, in response to a determination at the time of initiation that the attempted communication is permitted; and wherein the fourth means comprise means for determining whether the attempted communication is permitted, (a) at the time of initiation and between the two user's assigned communities determined at the time of initiation, and (b) at the time of completion and between the two user's assigned communities determined at the time of completion, in response to having determined at the time of initiation that the attempted communication is permitted.
13. The arrangement of claim 1 for a communication system having a plurality of subsystems each serving at least one of the system users, wherein the second means comprise means in each one of the subsystems for defining, for each user community, permissions with respect to individual ones of the other user communities; and wherein the fourth means comprise sixth means in the subsystem serving a first one of the two users, for determining from the defining means of the subsystem serving the first user whether the attempted communication is permitted and seventh means in the subsystem serving a second one of the two users, for determining from the defining means of the subsystem serving the second userwhether the attempted communication is permitted; and wherein the fifth means comprise means responsive to a determination by both the sixth and the seventh means that the communication is permitted for enabling the communication, and further responsive to a determination by either the sixth means or the seventh means that the attempted communication is not permitted for preventing the communication.
14. The arrangement of claim 13 wherein the first means comprise means in each one of the subsystems for assigning users of the communication system to ones of a plurality of user communities; wherein the third means comprise eighth means in the subsystem serving the first user for determining the two user's assigned communities in the subsystem serving the first user, and ninth means in the subsystem serving the second user for determining the two user's assigned communities in the subsystem serving the second user;
wherein the sixth means are responsive to the determination by the eighth means of the two user's assigned communities; and wherein the seventh means are responsive to the determination by the ninth means of the two user's assigned communities.
wherein the sixth means are responsive to the determination by the eighth means of the two user's assigned communities; and wherein the seventh means are responsive to the determination by the ninth means of the two user's assigned communities.
15. A method of controlling communications between user communities, comprising the steps of:
assigning each user of a communication system to one of a plurality of user communities;
defining, for each user community, communication permissions with respect to individual ones of the other user communities;
identifying two users in response to an attempted communication between the two users;
determining the two identified users' assigned communities;
determining from the defined permissions whether the attempted communication is permitted, in response to the determination of the two users' assigned communities;
enabling the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is permitted; and preventing the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is not permitted.
assigning each user of a communication system to one of a plurality of user communities;
defining, for each user community, communication permissions with respect to individual ones of the other user communities;
identifying two users in response to an attempted communication between the two users;
determining the two identified users' assigned communities;
determining from the defined permissions whether the attempted communication is permitted, in response to the determination of the two users' assigned communities;
enabling the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is permitted; and preventing the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is not permitted.
16. The method of claim 15 wherein the step of defining permissions comprises the step of defining the communication permissions for each pair of the user communities.
17. A method of controlling communications between user communities in a communication system including an arrangement that assigns each user of thecommunication system to one of a plurality of user communities, and an arrangement that defines, for each user community, communication permissions with respect to individual ones of the other user communities, comprising the steps of:
identifying two users in response to an attempted communication between the two users;
determining the two identified users' assigned communities;
determining from the defined permissions whether the attempted communication is permitted, in response to the determination of the two users' assigned communities;
enabling the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is permitted; and preventing the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is not permitted.
identifying two users in response to an attempted communication between the two users;
determining the two identified users' assigned communities;
determining from the defined permissions whether the attempted communication is permitted, in response to the determination of the two users' assigned communities;
enabling the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is permitted; and preventing the communication, in response to determining that the attempted communication is not permitted.
18. The method of claim 17 wherein the step of determining whether the attempted communication is permitted comprises the step of determining from the defined permissions whether the attempted communication is permitted between the two user's assigned communities.
19. The method of claim 17 further comprising the step of:
enabling the communication irrespective of the defined permissions, in response to an overriding permission having been specified for the attempted communication; and wherein the step of preventing the communication comprises the step of preventing the communication in response to both (a) determining that the attempted communication is not permitted and (b) an overriding permission not having been specified for the attempted communication.
enabling the communication irrespective of the defined permissions, in response to an overriding permission having been specified for the attempted communication; and wherein the step of preventing the communication comprises the step of preventing the communication in response to both (a) determining that the attempted communication is not permitted and (b) an overriding permission not having been specified for the attempted communication.
20. The method of claim 17 wherein the step of determining whether the attempted communication is permitted comprises the steps of determining at time of initiation of the attempted communication whether the attempted communication is permitted; and determining at time of completion of the attempted communication whether the attempted communication is permitted, in response to having determined at the time of initiation that the attempted communication is permitted.
21. The method of claim 18 wherein the step of determining two user's assigned communities comprises the steps of determining the two user's assigned communities at time of initiation of the attempted communication, and determining the two user's assigned communities at time of completion of the attempted communication in response to a determination at the time of initiation that the attempted communication is permitted; and wherein the step of determining whether the attempted communication is permitted comprises the steps of determining at the time of initiation whether the attempted communication is permitted between the two user's assigned communities determined at the time of initiation, and determining at the time of completion whether the attempted communication is permitted between the two user's assigned communities determined at the time of completion, in response to a determination at the time of initiation that the attempted communication is permitted.
22. The method of claim 17 for a communication system having a plurality of subsystems each serving at least one of the system users, and an arrangement in each one of the subsystems for defining, for each user community,permissions with respect to individual ones of the other user communities, wherein the step of determining whether the attempted communication is permitted comprises the steps of first determining from the permissions-defining arrangement of the subsystem serving a first one of the two users whether the attempted communication is permitted, and second determining from the permissions-defining arrangement of the subsystem serving a second one of the two users whether the attempted communication is permitted; wherein the step of enabling the communication involves enabling the communication in response to determining from the permissions-defining arrangement of both the subsystem serving the first user and the subsystem serving the second user that the communication is permitted; and wherein the step of preventing the communication involves preventing the communication in response to determining from the permissions-defining arrangement of either the subsystem serving the first user or the subsystem serving the second user that the communication is not permitted.
23. The method of claim 22 for a communication system further having an arrangement in each subsystem that assigns each user of the communication system to one of the plurality of user communities, wherein the step of determining two user's assigned communities comprises the steps of determining the two user's assigned communities in the subsystem serving the first user, and determining the two user's assigned communities in the subsystem serving the second user, wherein the step of first determining involves determining whether the attempted communication is permitted between the two user's assigned communities in the subsystem serving the first user; andwherein the step of second determining involves determining whether the attempted communication is permitted between the two users' assigned communities in the subsystem serving the second user.
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US07/292,295 US5017917A (en) | 1988-12-30 | 1988-12-30 | Restriction of communication service accessibility among subscriber communities |
| US292,295 | 1988-12-30 |
Publications (2)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2005996A1 CA2005996A1 (en) | 1990-06-30 |
| CA2005996C true CA2005996C (en) | 1998-06-02 |
Family
ID=23124054
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA002005996A Expired - Lifetime CA2005996C (en) | 1988-12-30 | 1989-12-19 | Restriction of communication service accessibility among subscriber communities |
Country Status (3)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (1) | US5017917A (en) |
| JP (1) | JP2954623B2 (en) |
| CA (1) | CA2005996C (en) |
Families Citing this family (86)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US6449346B1 (en) | 1985-07-10 | 2002-09-10 | Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. | Telephone-television interface statistical analysis system |
| US5898762A (en) | 1985-07-10 | 1999-04-27 | Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. | Telephonic-interface statistical analysis system |
| US5365575A (en) | 1985-07-10 | 1994-11-15 | First Data Resources Inc. | Telephonic-interface lottery system |
| US6678360B1 (en) | 1985-07-10 | 2004-01-13 | Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. | Telephonic-interface statistical analysis system |
| US5828734A (en) | 1985-07-10 | 1998-10-27 | Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, Lp | Telephone interface call processing system with call selectivity |
| US5351285A (en) * | 1985-07-10 | 1994-09-27 | First Data Resources Inc. | Multiple format telephonic interface control system |
| US5359645A (en) | 1985-07-10 | 1994-10-25 | First Data Corporation Inc. | Voice-data telephonic interface control system |
| US5793846A (en) | 1985-07-10 | 1998-08-11 | Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, Lp | Telephonic-interface game control system |
| US20040071278A1 (en) | 1985-07-10 | 2004-04-15 | Ronald A. Katz | Multiple format telephonic interface control system |
| US5835576A (en) | 1985-07-10 | 1998-11-10 | Ronald A. Katz Technology Licensing, L.P. | Telephonic-interface lottery device |
| US4845739A (en) | 1985-07-10 | 1989-07-04 | Fdr Interactive Technologies | Telephonic-interface statistical analysis system |
| US5311586A (en) * | 1991-10-31 | 1994-05-10 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Dynamic routing-administration |
| US5329582A (en) * | 1991-10-31 | 1994-07-12 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Dynamic tone-administration |
| US5289535A (en) * | 1991-10-31 | 1994-02-22 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Context-dependent call-feature selection |
| US5311584A (en) * | 1991-10-31 | 1994-05-10 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Telecommunications call-processing arrangement |
| US5343517A (en) * | 1991-10-31 | 1994-08-30 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Use-code based call-treatment selection |
| US5333188A (en) * | 1991-10-31 | 1994-07-26 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Dialed number recognition arrangement |
| US5555426A (en) * | 1992-01-08 | 1996-09-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for disseminating messages to unspecified users in a data processing system |
| US5299261A (en) * | 1992-02-24 | 1994-03-29 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Arrangement for effecting segmentation of a dialed number |
| US5321743A (en) * | 1992-02-24 | 1994-06-14 | At&T Bell Laboratories | Shared-tenant services arrangement providing numbering-plan independence and cross-plan access to tenant groups |
| US5404395A (en) * | 1992-02-24 | 1995-04-04 | At&T Corp. | External-to-internal numbering plan aliasing |
| US5412714A (en) * | 1992-02-24 | 1995-05-02 | At&T Corp. | Mnemonic and synonymic addressing in a telecommunications system |
| CA2085442C (en) * | 1992-02-25 | 1996-09-17 | Kerry Wayne Hassler | Mobile log-in capability featuring fixed physical translations and portable logical translations |
| US6266703B1 (en) * | 1992-12-29 | 2001-07-24 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for providing confirmation notification for isochronous data |
| US6885470B1 (en) * | 1995-03-06 | 2005-04-26 | Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. | Electronic mail system |
| JP3160177B2 (en) | 1995-03-06 | 2001-04-23 | 松下電器産業株式会社 | Facsimile electronic mail device |
| US5805810A (en) * | 1995-04-27 | 1998-09-08 | Maxwell; Robert L. | Apparatus and methods for converting an electronic mail to a postal mail at the receiving station |
| US5926538A (en) * | 1997-02-11 | 1999-07-20 | Genesys Telecommunications Labs, Inc | Method for routing calls to call centers based on statistical modeling of call behavior |
| US5825870A (en) * | 1996-04-05 | 1998-10-20 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories | Methods and apparatus for implementing a network call center |
| US5802163A (en) * | 1996-04-05 | 1998-09-01 | Genesys Telccommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for implementing an outbound network call center |
| US5765033A (en) * | 1997-02-06 | 1998-06-09 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | System for routing electronic mails |
| US5933492A (en) * | 1997-01-21 | 1999-08-03 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and system for determining and using multiple object states in a computer telephony integration system |
| US6130933A (en) * | 1996-02-02 | 2000-10-10 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Apparatus and methods for coordinating telephone and data communications |
| US5907677A (en) * | 1996-08-23 | 1999-05-25 | Ecall Inc. | Method for establishing anonymous communication links |
| US6272215B1 (en) | 1996-12-06 | 2001-08-07 | At&T Corp. | Intelligent call redirection |
| US6055308A (en) * | 1997-01-21 | 2000-04-25 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and system for determining and using multiple object states in a computer telephony integration system |
| US5946387A (en) * | 1997-02-10 | 1999-08-31 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc, | Agent-level network call routing |
| US5995614A (en) * | 1997-02-10 | 1999-11-30 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Dynamic requeing to avoid latency in call-routing systems |
| US7031442B1 (en) | 1997-02-10 | 2006-04-18 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Methods and apparatus for personal routing in computer-simulated telephony |
| US6185292B1 (en) * | 1997-02-10 | 2001-02-06 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Skill-based real-time call routing in telephony systems |
| US6104802A (en) | 1997-02-10 | 2000-08-15 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | In-band signaling for routing |
| US6201863B1 (en) | 1997-02-10 | 2001-03-13 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Personal desktop router |
| US6560328B1 (en) | 1997-04-03 | 2003-05-06 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Voice extensions in a call-in center employing virtual restructuring for computer telephony integrated functionality |
| US6480600B1 (en) | 1997-02-10 | 2002-11-12 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Call and data correspondence in a call-in center employing virtual restructuring for computer telephony integrated functionality |
| US6185291B1 (en) | 1997-02-10 | 2001-02-06 | Genesys Telecommunication Laboratories, Inc. | Personal desktop router |
| US6018578A (en) * | 1997-04-03 | 2000-01-25 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Call and data correspondence in a call-in center employing virtual restructuring for computer telephony integrated functionality |
| US6711611B2 (en) | 1998-09-11 | 2004-03-23 | Genesis Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and apparatus for data-linking a mobile knowledge worker to home communication-center infrastructure |
| US6985943B2 (en) | 1998-09-11 | 2006-01-10 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and apparatus for extended management of state and interaction of a remote knowledge worker from a contact center |
| US5968177A (en) * | 1997-10-14 | 1999-10-19 | Entrust Technologies Limited | Method and apparatus for processing administration of a secured community |
| USRE46528E1 (en) | 1997-11-14 | 2017-08-29 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Implementation of call-center outbound dialing capability at a telephony network level |
| US7907598B2 (en) | 1998-02-17 | 2011-03-15 | Genesys Telecommunication Laboratories, Inc. | Method for implementing and executing communication center routing strategies represented in extensible markup language |
| US6332154B2 (en) | 1998-09-11 | 2001-12-18 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing media-independent self-help modules within a multimedia communication-center customer interface |
| US6615182B1 (en) * | 1998-05-08 | 2003-09-02 | E-Talk Corporation | System and method for defining the organizational structure of an enterprise in a performance evaluation system |
| US6631182B1 (en) | 1998-07-29 | 2003-10-07 | Ameritech Corporation | Call screening apparatus and method |
| USRE46153E1 (en) | 1998-09-11 | 2016-09-20 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and apparatus enabling voice-based management of state and interaction of a remote knowledge worker in a contact center environment |
| US6223165B1 (en) | 1999-03-22 | 2001-04-24 | Keen.Com, Incorporated | Method and apparatus to connect consumer to expert |
| US6671718B1 (en) * | 1999-06-28 | 2003-12-30 | Mark Meister | Email client application incorporating an active transmit authorization request |
| US7929978B2 (en) | 1999-12-01 | 2011-04-19 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing enhanced communication capability for mobile devices on a virtual private network |
| US7542936B1 (en) | 2000-11-02 | 2009-06-02 | Utbk, Inc. | Method, apparatus and system for marketing, delivering, and collecting payment for information |
| US7289623B2 (en) | 2001-01-16 | 2007-10-30 | Utbk, Inc. | System and method for an online speaker patch-through |
| US20020133402A1 (en) | 2001-03-13 | 2002-09-19 | Scott Faber | Apparatus and method for recruiting, communicating with, and paying participants of interactive advertising |
| US6704403B2 (en) | 2001-09-05 | 2004-03-09 | Ingenio, Inc. | Apparatus and method for ensuring a real-time connection between users and selected service provider using voice mail |
| US20040008368A1 (en) * | 2001-09-07 | 2004-01-15 | Plunkett Michael K | Mailing online operation flow |
| US7580850B2 (en) * | 2001-12-14 | 2009-08-25 | Utbk, Inc. | Apparatus and method for online advice customer relationship management |
| US7937439B2 (en) | 2001-12-27 | 2011-05-03 | Utbk, Inc. | Apparatus and method for scheduling live advice communication with a selected service provider |
| US7421476B2 (en) * | 2002-10-29 | 2008-09-02 | Weaver Eric R | Method for converting internet messages for publishing |
| US7359498B2 (en) | 2003-06-12 | 2008-04-15 | Utbk, Inc. | Systems and methods for arranging a call |
| US7530112B2 (en) | 2003-09-10 | 2009-05-05 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing network security using role-based access control |
| US7836490B2 (en) | 2003-10-29 | 2010-11-16 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and apparatus for providing network security using security labeling |
| US8146148B2 (en) * | 2003-11-19 | 2012-03-27 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Tunneled security groups |
| US7752269B2 (en) * | 2004-01-19 | 2010-07-06 | Avaya Inc. | Adhoc secure document exchange |
| US8001609B1 (en) | 2004-09-17 | 2011-08-16 | Avaya Inc. | Method and apparatus for preventing the inadvertent or unauthorized release of information |
| US7669244B2 (en) * | 2004-10-21 | 2010-02-23 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and system for generating user group permission lists |
| US7877796B2 (en) | 2004-11-16 | 2011-01-25 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and apparatus for best effort propagation of security group information |
| US7886145B2 (en) * | 2004-11-23 | 2011-02-08 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and system for including security information with a packet |
| US7721323B2 (en) * | 2004-11-23 | 2010-05-18 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and system for including network security information in a frame |
| US7827402B2 (en) | 2004-12-01 | 2010-11-02 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and apparatus for ingress filtering using security group information |
| US8538768B2 (en) | 2005-02-16 | 2013-09-17 | Ingenio Llc | Methods and apparatuses for delivery of advice to mobile/wireless devices |
| US9008075B2 (en) | 2005-12-22 | 2015-04-14 | Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. | System and methods for improving interaction routing performance |
| US8681778B2 (en) | 2006-01-10 | 2014-03-25 | Ingenio Llc | Systems and methods to manage privilege to speak |
| US9197479B2 (en) * | 2006-01-10 | 2015-11-24 | Yellowpages.Com Llc | Systems and methods to manage a queue of people requesting real time communication connections |
| US20070165608A1 (en) * | 2006-01-10 | 2007-07-19 | Utbk, Inc. | Systems and Methods to Prioritize a Queue |
| US7840708B2 (en) * | 2007-08-13 | 2010-11-23 | Cisco Technology, Inc. | Method and system for the assignment of security group information using a proxy |
| JP2010015296A (en) * | 2008-07-02 | 2010-01-21 | Seiko Epson Corp | Multiprocessor system and fluid discharge device loaded with it |
| US20120195234A1 (en) * | 2011-01-31 | 2012-08-02 | Yigang Cai | Method for policy-based control of enterprise messaging |
| US9015196B2 (en) * | 2012-05-10 | 2015-04-21 | Dst Technologies, Inc. | Internal social network for an enterprise and applications thereof |
Family Cites Families (5)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US3692951A (en) * | 1970-06-05 | 1972-09-19 | Itt | Toll restrictor circuit |
| US3736383A (en) * | 1971-10-28 | 1973-05-29 | American Telephone & Telegraph | Multicustomer centralized call diverter |
| US4259549A (en) * | 1976-10-21 | 1981-03-31 | Wescom Switching, Inc. | Dialed number to function translator for telecommunications switching system control complex |
| JPS62214758A (en) * | 1986-03-14 | 1987-09-21 | Matsushita Electric Ind Co Ltd | Incoming call restricting equipment between extensions of electronic exchange |
| US4799255A (en) * | 1987-01-30 | 1989-01-17 | American Telephone And Telegraph Company - At&T Information Systems | Communication facilities access control arrangement |
-
1988
- 1988-12-30 US US07/292,295 patent/US5017917A/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
-
1989
- 1989-12-19 CA CA002005996A patent/CA2005996C/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 1989-12-26 JP JP1335245A patent/JP2954623B2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| JPH02231850A (en) | 1990-09-13 |
| CA2005996A1 (en) | 1990-06-30 |
| US5017917A (en) | 1991-05-21 |
| JP2954623B2 (en) | 1999-09-27 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CA2005996C (en) | Restriction of communication service accessibility among subscriber communities | |
| EP1142232B1 (en) | Communications prioritizer | |
| DE69535283T2 (en) | INTERNET SYSTEM FOR PERSONAL TRANSMISSION SERVICES | |
| CN1020838C (en) | Access network for cordless telephone service | |
| EP0909505B1 (en) | Method for managing telecommunications services | |
| EP0825752A2 (en) | Method and apparatus providing personalized mailbox filters | |
| CA1270584B (en) | Communication system having unified messaging | |
| CN101753485A (en) | The method of immediate news systems and this system of operation | |
| KR20000016304A (en) | Method and system for extended addressing plans | |
| US20060222156A1 (en) | Secure global telephone number system and method of operation | |
| CN101090548A (en) | Method for implementing multi-virtual identify of one mobile phone number in mobile immediate communication | |
| DE60318838T2 (en) | Method and apparatus for providing messages to the inbox service of a service message | |
| JPH02195754A (en) | Method of sending electronic message | |
| CN101444069B (en) | Method and system for transferring presence information from one presence owner to at least one presence watcher in a presence and intermediation system | |
| US7023972B1 (en) | Communication system and communication method sharing communication data among a plurality of communication terminals | |
| EP1107638B1 (en) | A method of enabling a customer of a mobile radio network to access an electronic mail server | |
| US6038308A (en) | ISDN primary rate interswitch mail using non-call associated temporary signalling | |
| KR100385836B1 (en) | Method for voice mailing system servicing closed user group in celluar system | |
| EP1254554B1 (en) | Server system for preparation of user-specific information for users in at least one communication network | |
| US7113770B2 (en) | Method and device for forming groups from subscribers to a communication network | |
| KR102487153B1 (en) | Mobile communication message distributed transmission system and method thereof | |
| Uhlig | Computer message systems | |
| GB2365664A (en) | Improved communication system | |
| MXPA96001448A (en) | Communication of electronic messages in an amp area network | |
| SE506430C2 (en) | Mobile telephone system with short message service |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EEER | Examination request | ||
| MKEX | Expiry |