Re: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02

"Dawes, Peter, Vodafone Group" <Peter.Dawes@vodafone.com> Fri, 12 June 2015 14:16 UTC

Return-Path: <Peter.Dawes@vodafone.com>
X-Original-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: insipid@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AD761AC43B for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 07:16:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o3AHZdKe53S7 for <insipid@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 07:16:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.166]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C046A1AC437 for <insipid@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 07:16:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [195.245.230.51] by server-6.bemta-3.messagelabs.com id 00/46-13517-4C9EA755; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 14:16:36 +0000
X-Env-Sender: Peter.Dawes@vodafone.com
X-Msg-Ref: server-10.tower-33.messagelabs.com!1434118595!11917854!1
X-Originating-IP: [195.232.244.133]
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 6.13.16; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 21602 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2015 14:16:35 -0000
Received: from mailout01.vodafone.com (HELO mailout01.vodafone.com) (195.232.244.133) by server-10.tower-33.messagelabs.com with DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 12 Jun 2015 14:16:35 -0000
Received: from mailint02.vodafone.com (mailint02.vodafone.com [195.232.244.199]) by mailout01.vodafone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3m7PHl3MPXz1yHf; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 16:16:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mailint02.vodafone.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailint02.vodafone.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3m7PHl2Rp9zQjwm; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 16:16:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from VOEXC03W.internal.vodafone.com (voexc03w.dc-ratingen.de [145.230.101.23]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailint02.vodafone.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3m7PHl24mFzQjQR; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 16:16:35 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from VOEXC13W.internal.vodafone.com (145.230.101.15) by VOEXC03W.internal.vodafone.com (145.230.101.23) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.224.2; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 16:16:34 +0200
Received: from VOEXM31W.internal.vodafone.com ([169.254.7.90]) by voexc13w.internal.vodafone.com ([145.230.101.15]) with mapi id 14.03.0224.002; Fri, 12 Jun 2015 16:16:33 +0200
From: "Dawes, Peter, Vodafone Group" <Peter.Dawes@vodafone.com>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>, "insipid@ietf.org" <insipid@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02
Thread-Index: AQHQoc9foLa+q9Pox0O1f/WxQlV+D52llvUAgAGof0CAAC7yAIABgS9Q
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 14:16:32 +0000
Message-ID: <4A4F136CBD0E0D44AE1EDE36C4CD9D99AEEE3151@VOEXM31W.internal.vodafone.com>
References: <55756367.7090109@gmx.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D8B6E33@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <4A4F136CBD0E0D44AE1EDE36C4CD9D99AEEE2BDC@VOEXM31W.internal.vodafone.com> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D8BDFDB@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D8BDFDB@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/insipid/ZzUb7Fl-n21m8YNTDtMAkzuYMbo>
Subject: Re: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02
X-BeenThere: insipid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Session-ID discussion list <insipid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/insipid/>
List-Post: <mailto:insipid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid>, <mailto:insipid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 14:16:40 -0000

Thanks Christer, I will make these improvements in the next (-03) version, probably early July.

Regards,
Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:christer.holmberg@ericsson.com]
> Sent: 11 June 2015 18:12
> To: Dawes, Peter, Vodafone Group; insipid@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> See inline.
> 
> Q2 (editorial/technical):
> 
> >> I don't understand REQ4, saying "SIP entities SHOULD log SIP requests
> >> or responses with a "log me" marker."
> >>
> >> Also, in e.g. REQ6 it is then said that proxies MAY insert the
> >> marker, which seems to contradict.
> >>
> > REQ4 could be re-written slightly more clearly as "SIP entities SHOULD
> > log SIP requests or responses that contain a "log me" marker." The SIP
> > entity checks for the presence of a "log me" marker and writes any
> > request or response that contains a "log me" marker to a log file.
> 
> I think it would be good to say "SIP entities that support the mechanism
> SHOULD...", to make it clear that we don't expect certain behaviour from SIP
> entities that do not support the mechanism. Some people may say it's
> obvious, but I think it's good to have it explicit :)
> 
> > REQ 6 allows a SIP proxy to insert a "log me" marker to allow the
> > mechanism to work even if the UE does not support this draft, so this talks
> about inserting a "log me" marker and not checking for its presence.
> 
> Got it. Thanks for the clarification.
> 
> 
> Q3 (editorial/technical):
> 
> >> Regarding REQ5, does that also apply to UAs that do NOT support the
> >> mechanism? If so, I think that should be explicitly stated, because
> >> it will have big impact on the technical solution.
> >>
> > UEs that do not support the mechanism are not expected to echo the
> > "log me" marker because they don't know about it. However, if the "log
> > me" marker solution is a header field parameter of the Session-ID
> > header field, as currently proposed, then I guess that even UEs that do not
> support inserting a "log me" marker will echo it if it echoes the whole
> Session-ID header field.
> 
> Sure, but that is irrelevant as far as the requirements are concerned :)
> 
> So, if we don't REQUIRE anything from UAs that don't support the
> mechanism, I again think it's good to explicitly talk about UAs that support
> the mechanism.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: insipid [mailto:insipid-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Georg
> > Mayer
> > Sent: 8. kesäkuuta 2015 12:42
> > To: insipid@ietf.org
> > Cc: Peter.Dawes@vodafone.com
> > Subject: [Insipid] Review of draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I finally managed to review draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs-02. I have
> > no technical comments on it and support all the requirements therein.
> > In my view the draft can progress as is.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Georg
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > insipid mailing list
> > insipid@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/insipid