Re: [dispatch] Progressing draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates as AD sponsored

Agree strongly.

One of the issues (and there were others) is that the table mechanism required some form of extension every time a new method was identified. Text allows a much more broad brush categorization of methods (e.g. "any request that creates a dialog", "a request or response within a dialog" etc.) such that this does not need to happen.

I'd note that we were heading in this direction considerably earlier than IETF 77.

Keith

-----Original Message-----
From: dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of EXT A. Jean Mahoney
Sent: 10 March 2016 16:20
To: marianne.mohali@orange.com; DISPATCH
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Progressing draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates as AD sponsored

Hi Marianne,

On 3/9/16 10:07 AM, marianne.mohali@orange.com wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I do support this draft to be progressed as AD sponsored.
>
> However, I have the following comment: In section 4. I think it would 
> be useful to add a table after the "new text" paragraph that summarize 
> where the different header fields can appear as it was done in section
> 5.7 of RFC 3455.

The table in 5.7 of RFC 3455 was an extension of Table 2 in RFC 3261, and for a while all SIP drafts that specified new header fields built on Table 2. After discussion at IETF 77, there was consensus that it would be better to describe the use of header fields in prose rather than in table format:

http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/10mar/minutes/sipcore.html#SIP%20Table%202%20/%203

RFC 7315 removed the table. Now, its prose didn't capture everything that was in the table, which is what this draft is fixing. However, prose is still a better way to define the use of header fields than extending Table 2.

Thanks,

Jean

>
> Best Regards,
>
> Marianne Mohali
>
> *De :*dispatch [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] *De la part de* Mary 
> Barnes *Envoyé :* lundi 7 mars 2016 16:34 *À :* DISPATCH *Objet :* 
> [dispatch] Progressing draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updates
> as AD sponsored
>
> Hi folks,
>
> This document has been proposed to be progressed as AD sponsored:
>
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-holmberg-dispatch-rfc7315-updat
> es/
>
> The document has been carefully reviewed and it is now ready to move 
> forward - Jean Mahoney is the shepherd.
>
> I don't anticipate anyone would have concerns about this decision, 
> given that's how RFC 7315 was progressed and this update has actually 
> been much more carefully reviewed.  However, f anyone has any final 
> comments, please post no later than Friday, March 11th, 2016.  Note, 
> that you will also still have IETF LC to provide any comments.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mary.
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ___________________________________________________
>
> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, 
> exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message 
> par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
>
> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or 
> privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
> Thank you.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
>

_______________________________________________
dispatch mailing list
dispatch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch