Re: [Insipid] draft-dawes-insipid-logme-marking-00

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

Just a couple of comments:

General comment: Run IdNits on this. You at least have lines that are 
too long.

Section 5.7.2. (B2BUA Processing of Log-Me Marker):

ISTM that not all B2BUAs should act the same way:

- SBC-like B2BUAs will most likely want to forward the logme marker from 
the incoming dialog to the corresponding outgoing dialog.

- more specialized B2BUAs may not want to do that. E.g., a conference 
focus may not want to forward incoming logme markers to all the other 
participant dialogs.

STRAW has a B2BUA taxonomy that might be useful to you for sorting this out.

	Thanks,
	Paul

On 7/11/14 9:59 AM, Dawes, Peter, Vodafone Group wrote:
> Hello All,
> I have updated the draft that describes a protocol solution to the 'log me' requirements in http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-insipid-logme-reqs/ based on comments on the list and at IETF#89 in London. Draft submission seems to be closed until July 21st so I have copied the text below I will upload when submission re-opens. The main changes are:
>
> 	- only one solution is described, based on the Session-ID header field
> 	- renamed the draft from "draft-dawes-inspid-logme-solutions" to "draft-dawes-insipid-logme-marking-00"
> 	- removed all text related to sending logs to a server
> 	- redundant references have been removed and some references have been moved from "informative" to "normative"
> 	- added clauses for ABNF and IANA considerations
> 	- key words capitalized
>
> I would be happy to hear any comments or questions.
>
> Regards,
> Peter