Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-push-21 - The pull request

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

This looks good to me. Please submit a new revision when you are ready.

Since these changes look minor and not likely to be controversial, I am going to go ahead and create a ballot for this. It will likely end up on the 10 January telechat.

Thanks!

Ben.

> On Dec 21, 2018, at 2:50 AM, Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Based on the gen-art comments from Stewart, I have created a pull request for the suggested changes.
> 
> https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-sip-push/pull/31 <https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-sip-push/pull/31>
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> From: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Date: Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 17.37
> To: Stewart Bryant <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Cc: "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-push-21
> Resent-From: <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Resent-To: Christer Holmberg <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "A. Mahoney" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Brian Rosen <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Ben Campbell <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, "[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>" <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>, Brian Rosen <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>>
> Resent-Date: Thursday, 20 December 2018 at 17.37
> 
> Hi Stewart,
> 
> Thank You for the review! Please see inline.
> 
> >Summary: A well written document with some minor points that could use a little
> >attention.
> >
> >Major issues: None
> >
> >Minor issues:
> >
> >In Figure 1 the following is included:
> >
> >     REGISTER sip:[e-mail] <sip:[e-mail]> SIP/2.0
> >     Via: SIP/2.0/TCP alicemobile.example.com:5060 <http://alicemobile.example.com:5060/>;branch=z9hG4bKnashds7
> >     Max-Forwards: 70
> >     To: Alice <sip:[e-mail] <sip:[e-mail]>>
> >     From: Alice <sip:[e-mail] <sip:[e-mail]>>;tag=456248
> >     Call-ID: 843817637684230@998sdasdh09
> >     CSeq: 1826 REGISTER
> >     Contact: <sip:[e-mail] <sip:[e-mail]>;
> >       pn-provider=acme;
> >       pn-param=acme-param;
> >       pn-prid=ZTY4ZDJlMzODE1NmUgKi0K>
> >     Expires: 7200
> >     Content-Length: 0
> >
> > SB> However I don't at this stage of the text see the relationship between the
> > SB> packet flow digram and the text that follows.
> 
> I could add the following:
> 
> “Below is an example of a SIP REGISTER request in Figure 1.”
> 
> =========
> 
> >   Contact: IESG ([e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>)
> >
> > SB> Is the whole IESG the most appropriate first point of contact?
> 
> That is what I was told :)
> 
> Note that I have used it also for other documents.
> 
> =========
> 
> >Nits/editorial comments:
> >Presumably the references to RFC XXXX will be replaced by RFC <this RFC> but
> >that does not seem to be noted in the text
> 
> I will add a note to the RFC editor about that.
> 
>         “[RFC EDITOR NOTE: Please replace RFCXXXX with the RFC number of this document.]”
> 
> ========
> 
> > SB> As dicussed in [RFC4320] and [RFC4321], non-INVITE transactions must
> > SB> Typo s/dicussed/discussed/
> 
> I will fix as suggested.
> 
> ========
> 
> >   Example: pn-prid = 00fc13adff78512
> >
> >   For more information about the APNs Topic and device token:
> >
> > SB> Is the following part of the example? If so it could usefully be delimited
> > SB> as such, otherwise, I don't understand why it is not a normal document
> > SB> reference.
> >
> >   https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/NetworkingI <https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/documentation/NetworkingI>
> >   nternet/Conceptual/RemoteNotificationsPG/CommunicatingwithAPNs.html
> >
> > SB> Similarly in the following section
> 
> The link reference is not part of the example. Perhaps I could place to reference before the examples, to make that more clear?
> 
> Are you suggesting that I add the link to the reference section, similar to document references?
> 
> =========
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer