IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [dispatch] draft-jesske-sipping-etsi-ngn-reason-04

<R.Jesske@telekom.de> Fri, 17 July 2009 05:56 UTC

Return-Path: <R.Jesske@telekom.de>
X-Original-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 859D83A6E28 for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:56:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.583
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.583 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.666, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ECRTGaXNBsrL for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:56:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tcmail33.telekom.de (tcmail33.telekom.de [194.25.30.7]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E63B3A67ED for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jul 2009 22:56:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from s4de8psaanq.blf.telekom.de (HELO S4DE8PSAANQ.mitte.t-com.de) ([10.151.180.166]) by tcmail31.telekom.de with ESMTP; 17 Jul 2009 07:57:07 +0200
Received: from S4DE8PSAAQB.mitte.t-com.de ([10.151.229.13]) by S4DE8PSAANQ.mitte.t-com.de with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:57:07 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 07:59:30 +0200
Message-ID: <9886E5FCA6D76549A3011068483A4BD404A9B6D7@S4DE8PSAAQB.mitte.t-com.de>
In-Reply-To: <1247763684.4085.21.camel@victoria-pingtel-com.us.nortel.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: AW: AW: [dispatch] draft-jesske-sipping-etsi-ngn-reason-04
Thread-Index: AcoGNxHV6QgqrAdhT7e9Epm/Rzi3RQAbJyDg
References: <9886E5FCA6D76549A3011068483A4BD40498CFB8@S4DE8PSAAQB.mitte.t-com.de> <1246894612.3747.17.camel@victoria-pingtel-com.us.nortel.com> <9886E5FCA6D76549A3011068483A4BD40498D2CA@S4DE8PSAAQB.mitte.t-com.de> <1247255492.3757.40.camel@victoria-pingtel-com.us.nortel.com> <9886E5FCA6D76549A3011068483A4BD404A14E83@S4DE8PSAAQB.mitte.t-com.de> <1247763684.4085.21.camel@victoria-pingtel-com.us.nortel.com>
From: R.Jesske@telekom.de
To: dworley@nortel.com
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Jul 2009 05:57:07.0833 (UTC) FILETIME=[6B03D690:01CA06A3]
Cc: dispatch@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dispatch] draft-jesske-sipping-etsi-ngn-reason-04
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 05:56:45 -0000

Thank you Dale for your input.
I have changed the Abstract.

BR,

Roland 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Dale Worley [mailto:dworley@nortel.com] 
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Juli 2009 19:01
An: Jesske, Roland
Cc: dispatch@ietf.org; esasaki@shui-usjapan.com
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: [dispatch] draft-jesske-sipping-etsi-ngn-reason-04

On Mon, 2009-07-13 at 08:16 +0200, R.Jesske@telekom.de wrote:

> The main probblem is that reasons are currently not allowed in
> responses. Neither conditionally nor allowed
> 
> Please see: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipping/current/msg09682.html

That clarifies things.

Let me rephrase my complaint:  Although the text of the RFC states "The
Reason header field MAY appear in [...] any response whose status code
explicitly allows the presence of this header field.", that text is
stunningly unclear that the consequence is that the Reason header is not
allowed in *any* defined response, and a casual reader might not realize
that Reason is thus effectively forbidden in all responses.

Expanding the Abstract along these lines would make the significance and
importance of the draft much clearer:

        Although the use of the Reason header in responses is considered
        in RFC 3326, doing so is not specified for any existing response
        code.  This document specifies the use of the Reason header
        field in SIP responses to carry Q.850 reason codes for the
        failure of an INVITE.
        
Dale

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email