Re: [martini] New text for gin section 7.1.1 first paragraph

Well I can turn the sentence round if you really wanted to: 

"An SSP needs to provide a means of assigning globally routable contact URIs to UAs that have been registered using the bulk registration mechanism specified in this document, thereby allowing other entities to address out-of-dialog requests to those UAs. If the SSP provides no other means of providing globally routable contact URIs (e.g., by acting as a B2BUA and performing mapping between SIP-PBX-provided local contact URIs and SSP-provided globally routable contact URIs), then an SSP MUST support the public GRUU mechanism described in this section."

means exactly the same thing, and specified as IF condition THEN xxx MUST requirement, and which is perfectly correct RFC 2119 usage.

I'm suggesting we do so, as I think the existing format is perfectly clear, apart from the people who will insist on treating it as optional no matter what it says.

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: martini-bounces@ietf.org 
> [mailto:martini-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Paul Kyzivat
> Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 9:40 PM
> To: Adam Roach
> Cc: martini@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [martini] New text for gin section 7.1.1 first paragraph
> 
> I'm also happy with this text.
> 
> Now we get to confront the language police: is "... MUST ... 
> unless P ..." acceptable? (I'm pretty sure the logically 
> equivalent "... if !P then MUST ..." has to be ok.)
> 
> 	Thanks,
> 	Paul
> 
> On 9/27/2010 4:18 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
> >
> > I support this proposed text. I believe it strikes a good balance 
> > between mandating GRUUs and providing networks with alternative 
> > architectures the ability to implement routing as they see fit.
> >
> > /a
> >
> > On 9/27/10 2:30 PM, Elwell, John wrote:
> >> As actioned on this evening's call, here is my proposed text:
> >>
> >> "An SSP needs to provide a means of assigning globally routable 
> >> contact URIs to UAs that have been registered using the bulk 
> >> registration mechanism specified in this document, thereby 
> allowing 
> >> other entities to address out-of-dialog requests to those UAs. To 
> >> achieve this, an SSP MUST support the public GRUU 
> mechanism described 
> >> in this section, unless the SSP has other means of 
> providing globally 
> >> routable contact URIs (e.g., by acting as a B2BUA and performing 
> >> mapping between SIP-PBX-provided local contact URIs and 
> SSP-provided 
> >> globally routable contact URIs)."
> >>
> >> John
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> martini mailing list
> >> martini@ietf.org
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > martini mailing list
> > martini@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini
> >
> _______________________________________________
> martini mailing list
> martini@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/martini
> 