Re: [Ecrit] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-ecrit-psap-callback-10

[Hannes Tschofenig <[e-mail]>]

Hi Vijay,

thanks for the time to review the document so carefully.

I have just submitted an updated version and I indeed think that your 
review feedback has improved the quality of the document.

Ciao
Hannes

On 27.09.2013 22:17, Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
> Hannes:
>
> I am happy with the changes outlined below. I am convinced they
> make the document better. Thank you for attending to my comments.
>
> On 09/27/2013 01:48 PM, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
>> Hi Vijay,
>>
>> I updated the draft to take your remarks into account.
>>
>> I liked the security requirements text to the security threats section,
>> as you suggested.
>>
>> I believe you have a point regarding the remark about the security
>> solution. The current description focuses on the PSAP but not on the UA.
>> I assumed that we essentially inherit the functionality from the
>> PhoneBCP document but that should be expressed somewhere.
>>
>> So, I added the following section to the draft:
>>
>> ----
>>
>> The approach for dealing with implementing the security requirements
>> described in Section 5.2 can be differentiated between the behavior
>> applied by the UA and by SIP proxies. A UA that has made an
>> emergency call will keep state information so that it can recognize
>> and accepted a callback from the PSAP if it occurs within a
>> reasonable time after an emergency call was placed, as described in
>> Section 13 of [RFC6443]. Since UA considerations are described
>> already in [RFC6443] as well as in [RFC6881] the rest of this section
>> focuses on the behavior of SIP proxies.
>>
>> -----
>>
>> What do you think about that addition? Do you think it addresses your
>> concern?
>
> Cheers,
>
> - vijay