USOO72491.61B2 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 7,249,161 B2 Srinivas et al. (45) Date of Patent: Jul. 24, 2007 (54) METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR 2002/0055975 A1* 5/2002 Petrovykh ................... 709/205 FACILITATING INSTANT MESSAGING 2002fOO65938 A1 5/2002 Jungck et al. ... ... 709/246 TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN DISPARATE 2003/013 1061 A1* 7/2003 Newton et al. ............. TO9,206 SERVICE PROVIDERS 2004/0019637 A1 1/2004 Goodman et al. .......... TO9.204 2004.?0030750 A1 2/2004 Moore et al. ........ ... 709.204 (75) Inventors: BindignavileAAA- Srinivas, Westford, MA S-8. A. 33. MSNoran etet al. al. ............................ 370/352709,227 (US); Mitri Abou-Rizk, Newton, MA 2004/0249891 A1* 12/2004 Khartabil et al. ........... TO9,206 (US) FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS (73) Assignee: Nokia Corporation, Espoo (FI) EP 1 104964 A1 6, 2001 (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this WO WO O1/86471 A1 11, 2001 patent is extended or adjusted under 35 U.S.C. 154(b) by 793 days. OTHER PUBLICATIONS Crocker, D., et al., “Common Presence and Instant Messaging (21) Appl. No.: 10/331,040 (CPIM) draft-ietf-impp-cpim-03”. Aug. 14, 2002, IETF Standard (22) Filed Dec. 27, 2002 Working-Draft, Internet Engineering Task Force, 36 pgs. 1C eC. Af * cited by examiner (65) Prior Publication Data Primary Examiner Jinsong Hu US 2004/O128352 A1 Jul. 1, 2004 (74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm—Harrington & Smith, PC (51) Int. Cl. (57) ABSTRACT G06F 5/3 (2006.01) (52) U.S. Cl. ...................... 709/206: 709/205; 709/246; A method and system is described for facilitating instant 370/335 messaging (IM) between a first user with an address that (58) Field of Classification Search ................ 709/205, includes a first domain name and a second user with an 709/206, 246; 370/335 address that includes a second domain name different from See application file for complete search history. the first. A substitute address is chosen that includes the second domain name and is mapped to the first address. An (56) References Cited IM sent from the first user to the second is copied and U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS re-addressed to be sent from the substitute address. This maintains consistency of domain names between the 6,912,564 B1 6/2005 Appelman et al........... TO9.204 addressor and addressee, allowing existing IM systems that 7,016,978 B2 * 3/2006 Malik et al. ................ TO9,246 inhibit IM between incompatible IMSPs to deliver the 7,058,036 B1* 6/2006 Yu et al - - - - - - - - - - - - ... 370,335 message. 2002fOOO6803 A1 1/2002 Mendiola et al. .. ... 455,466 2002fOO21307 A1 2/2002 Glenn et al. ................ 345,753 2002/0035605 A1 3f2002 McDowell et al. ......... TO9,206 15 Claims, 5 Drawing Sheets ISP critis...N.R.E.2gresses r? - - - SP RECENEEwere FRO 2 com- (MSP1) - 24 MSPSF. Fissom) r" ESEENS-ENE - 2 (FOR OUTPUT MESSAGES) AND BETWEENTEMPORARY ID AND JSER1 (FOR INPUT MESSAGEs) SP ACCESSES Ap 30 IMSP1 coPES TEXT OF MESSAGE (PROBABLY WITH soME - 32 RE-FORMATTING AND SENDS IT RE-ADDRESSED FROM substitute8xz.com. To user28.xyz.com. - MSP2 CLIENSERVER DEWERS THE cored TEXT - 34 To user29xyz.com JMSP2 CLENT FOR USER2 REPLIES TO THE MESSAGE (DESTINATION OF THE MESSAGE IS; substitutexyz.com AND 36 SINCE THIS IS THE ORIGINATION; AND SENDER IS user2xyz.com) IMSF KEES ONMONTRING FOR ANY ESSAGES - 38 RECEIVED TO substituteoxyz.com - AS SONAS THE REPLY MESSAGES RECENEDT - 40 substitutexyz.cnn. ISP1 INTERCEPTS THE REPY MESSAGE AND ACCESSES THE SORED APPN3 DATA - MSP1 TcoPESTEXT FROM subst:texyzger. OF REPLY MESSAGE To user.18abe.com ANDRE-ADDRESSES - 42 - - - - BACK TO 3 -- ISP1 COPES THE CORE MESSA, to MSP cueNir 44 U.S. Patent Jul. 24, 2007 Sheet 1 of 5 US 7.249,161 B2 y 5 v) 2. N 2 T O N I. v) 2 2 3 2 e e 2 U.S. Patent Jul. 24, 2007 Sheet 3 of 5 US 7.249,161 B2 (7, KY aay g US 7,249,161 B2 1. 2 METHOD AND SYSTEM FOR presence information for the user2 client, the message from FACLITATING INSTANT MESSAGING userl is sent directly to user2. TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN DISPARATE It can be noted at this point that in IM the sending of the SERVICE PROVIDERS message is not guaranteed, so that if an IM is sent from a Source to a destination there is no guarantee that it will reach TECHNICAL FIELD the destination (although this is rare). Note as well that it may be possible to send a message to an end-user that has These teachings relate generally to instant messaging on not logged into the IMSP server, although the behavior of an electronic network, Such as the internet or an intranet this feature is server dependent (e.g., Yahoo will save a (e.g., a private network), between two or more user 10 user's messages until the next time the user logs in, while addresses in different domains. It is particularly related to some other IMSPs may not). Also, note that the message instant messaging among two or more user addresses from user1 is not sent directly to user2, it is routed instead wherein at least two user addresses include domain names through the IMSP Server software. that differ from one another, such as from different instant That is, current IM architecture passes all IM messages 15 through a server, which routes the message. A reply from messaging service providers. user2 is transmitted to userl in like manner. An IM session remains open until one of the users logs off. Such as by BACKGROUND logging off of his client. That client then signals the IMSP server of the offline status, and the server then notifies the Instant messaging (IM) is a method and system of live or clients of all of the online buddies of that revised status. Note nearly live communication, over the internet or other elec that logging off of a client may be distinguished from closing tronic network, between two users who are both simulta a client, which may be instead only a change in presence neously logged on to an IM service provider (IMSP). The information (e.g., active to idle). IMSP provides access to the network as well as software to One major limitation has been that users of one IMSP facilitate IM between its users. It should be noted that there 25 identified by one domain name could not effect IM with are generally two types of software: “Client-software' that users of another IMSP identified by a different domain name. is downloaded by the end-user (generally this is distributed This is because each IMSP has its own proprietary standards freely) and “Server-Software” that is not downloaded by the on how they pack and unpack messages, standards that are end-user. The Server-Software is the core and the engine of not necessarily enabling of the proprietary standards of the IMSP. It is the Server-Software behavior that distin 30 others. Some users have overcome this limitation by main guishes IMSPs from one another by offering different com taining accounts in each IMSP in which one of their poten pelling features. Typically, users download IM Client-Soft tial buddies has an account. However, this leads to users ware that enables them to engage in IM with other users of having to maintain multiple accounts with multiple login the same IMSP who have also downloaded the same or identifiers and passwords, having to maintain open clients compatible software. There are a variety of IMSPs, for 35 for each IMSP a user chooses to monitor during any given example: Wireless Village (WV), AOL, Yahoo!, MSN and session on his computer, and the inability to have an IM ICO (AOL is a registered trademark of America Online, Inc.; conversation with two buddies who each use a different Yahoo! is a registered trademark of Yahoo! Inc.; MSN is a IMSP. For example, userl (a yahoo.com could engage in IM registered trademark of the Microsoft Corporation; and ICO with user2Clyahoo.com, but not with user2Olmsn.com. is a registered trademark of ICO, Inc.). IM software from 40 Certain IMSPs advertise an ability to facilitate IM com one IMSP generally does not enable IM communications munications between users of only specified domains that with users of another IMSP, since most IMSPs use a differ. For example, Odigo (Odigo is a registered trademark proprietary Solution. of Odigo, Inc.) asserts on its website (www.Odigo.org) that Typical IM software today includes a first user (for IM users can access two distinct IMSPs: AIM and ICO. The example, user1) downloading the IM Client-Software onto 45 specific protocol for facilitating this appears to be propri his own computer. The IM software downloaded onto a etary. However, since IM is only enabled between specified user's computer is generally referred to as the Client domains, it is assumed the service is facilitated by servers Software (or more simply as the client), a convention that is associated with each domain acting in concert under a continued herein. The client connects to an IMSP server contractual relation between the IMSPs. when userl logs on. The client is pre-configured to know the 50 For convention with regard to this disclosure, an IM IP address of the server, So when a user logs in (by entering address “username(a)domainname' is parsed as follows. The the username and password) using the pre-downloaded characters to the left of the (a symbol are referred to as the proprietary client, it (the client) requests to connect and username. The characters to the right of the (a symbol authenticate the user to the server.