IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Iptel] Sending draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np to IESG

"Tom-PT Taylor" <taylor@nortel.com> Thu, 08 December 2005 16:20 UTC

Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EkOVR-0003kF-4Z; Thu, 08 Dec 2005 11:20:29 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EkOVO-0003j1-5Y for iptel@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2005 11:20:28 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA05041 for <iptel@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:19:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EkOV5-0006Rw-6B for iptel@ietf.org; Thu, 08 Dec 2005 11:20:09 -0500
Received: from zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com (zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com [47.140.202.51]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id jB8GJmu02450; Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:19:48 -0500 (EST)
Received: from zcarhxs1.corp.nortel.com ([47.129.230.89]) by zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:19:12 -0500
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([47.130.16.237] RDNS failed) by zcarhxs1.corp.nortel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Thu, 8 Dec 2005 11:19:11 -0500
Message-ID: <43985CFA.2090300@nortel.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2005 11:19:06 -0500
From: Tom-PT Taylor <taylor@nortel.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7 (Windows/20050923)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <vkg@lucent.com>
Subject: Re: [Iptel] Sending draft-ietf-iptel-tel-np to IESG
References: <BFBA57A6.63B4D%fluffy@cisco.com> <43985991.2090005@lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <43985991.2090005@lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Dec 2005 16:19:11.0576 (UTC) FILETIME=[1FAA4D80:01C5FC13]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: IETF IPTEL WG <iptel@ietf.org>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, james.yu@neustar.biz
X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP Telephony <iptel.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/iptel>
List-Post: <mailto:iptel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: iptel-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: iptel-bounces@ietf.org

RFC 2119 makes MUST and SHALL equivalent.

Vijay K. Gurbani wrote:
> Cullen Jennings wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> I hoping that someone can do a NITS review of this draft and send James
>> comments so he can resubmit a version I can request publication on.
> 
> 
> I know Alex graciously volunteered for this, but I was also able
> to find some time to do a nits review of tel-np.  Hopefully, along
> with Alex's, this'll help the author as well.
> 
> Overall, the document is well written and easy to read.  The nits
> I found are listed below.
> 
> 0) At various point in the document, a SHALL strength is used
>  where (to me) a MUST strength is applicable (like adding the
>  "npdi" parameter, removing the "cic" and so on).  Is it
>  intentional that SHALL has been used and not MUST?  It could
>  be that I am missing some history on this, since I have not
>  tracked the draft from inception; and if so, please disregard
>  this comment.
...


_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
Iptel@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email