Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-sipclf-format-05

Gonzalo Salgueiro <> Thu, 09 February 2012 14:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92EB821F84E6 for <>; Thu, 9 Feb 2012 06:44:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.31
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.31 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.288, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lmZdkFNCJkR1 for <>; Thu, 9 Feb 2012 06:44:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87F5121F861D for <>; Thu, 9 Feb 2012 06:44:15 -0800 (PST)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q19EiDf2029016 for <>; Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:44:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q19EiCec025302; Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:44:12 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-20-451617382
From: Gonzalo Salgueiro <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:44:11 -0500
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <>
To: Claudio Allocchio <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
Cc: " Mailing" <>,, Gonzalo Camarillo <>,
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-sipclf-format-05
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:44:16 -0000

Hi Claudio - 

On Feb 9, 2012, at 2:47 AM, Claudio Allocchio wrote:

> Hello all!
>>> * Section "3. Document Conventions"
>>> The authors have decided "For the sake of clarity and completeness" to quote a full section of RFC4475 into this document. However there were quite long discussions in the Apps Dir in other reviews if this quoting practice is appropriate or not, because it can lead to discrepacies, when the quoted document is updated or obsoleted, resuing in confusion for the readers who just trust the quoted text without checking the state of the referenced document. I would suggest, as in the other cases, NOT to quote the external text, but to use an explicit external reference only, urging the reader to check that "for the sake of clarity".
>> I agree with the position but in this particular case I'm of the mind that removing that text and referencing the RFC diminishes the effectiveness of that section. It is my preference to leave the quoted text (which is very short) embedded in this document as it is critical to understanding the notation used throughout the document.
> maybe a possible compromise is to quote the text, as is now, but to add a small note which reminds the reader to check the update/obsoletes status of RFC4475? ;-)

I could add that but bear in mind that I only care about the quoted text dealing with formatting rules from RFC4475 and nothing else. So whether it gets updated or obsoleted is irrelevant in this case. In fact, if it gets updated and it affects the formatting guidelines I quoted then I don't want to reference it at all since it is no longer useful or significant to this draft.
>>> * Section "4. Format"
>> This is something that we have discussed and have not found an elegant solution for. While there are maintenance risks it was thought to be very valuable to display the pertinent portion of the complete CLF within the section where that was discussed. I'll do my best to ensure that they are all copied over properly from Figure 1.
> as I said, it is a Nit... thanks for taking some time in thinking about it.

Thanks to you for your careful review.

Warm Regards,


> have a nice day!
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Claudio Allocchio             G   A   R   R
>                        Senior Technical Officer
> tel: +39 040 3758523      Italian Academic and       G=Claudio; S=Allocchio;
> fax: +39 040 3758565        Research Network         P=garr; A=garr; C=it;
>           PGP Key: