Re: [Gen-art] Fwd: Gen-art LC review: draft-holmerg-dispatch-iotl-03.txt

[Robert Sparks <[e-mail]>]

On 12/19/14 3:10 AM, Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
snipping to just a couple of the nit things:
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
>> Since you are providing an extension point for other values, someone
>> will ask if you need a registry for those values. I suggest explicitly
>> saying we are not creating a registry at this time but expect to do so
>> if the extension point is ever used to head that conversation off.
> I could add the following text to the Syntax/General section:
>
> 	"This specification does not create an IANA registry for 'iotl' parameter values.
> 	If new parameters values are defined in the future, such registry needs to be
> 	created."
>
> Or, do you think it should be somewhere else?
It's fine there. However, I would change the last sentence to "A 
registry should be considered
if new parameter values are defined in the future".
>
>> The sentence (which occurs in the abstract and introduction) "The
>> directionality in traffic legs relates to a SIP request creating a
>> dialogue and stand-alone SIP request." does not parse. What is it trying
>> to say, and why is it important?
> The sentence is not needed (and it doesn't belong in the Abstract to begin with), so I suggest to remove it.
You'll remove it from the introduction as well?
>
> -------------
>
> Thanks!
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer