[OPS-DIR]Re: draft-ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer-32 ietf last call Opsdir review

[[e-mail]]

Hi Jen, 

Thanks for the review. 

FYI, I balloted DISCUSS as there are some points that I think need to be fixed (focus on the modelling part): https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/asap/G9Z7NNUh60SLuv_6WKyB4fsLzas/

Cheers,
Med

> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Jen Linkova via Datatracker <[e-mail]>
> Envoyé : mercredi 17 septembre 2025 10:06
> À : [e-mail]
> Cc : [e-mail]; [e-mail];
> [e-mail]
> Objet : [OPS-DIR]draft-ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer-32 ietf last call
> Opsdir review
> 
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer
> Title: Automatic Peering for SIP Trunks
> Reviewer: Jen Linkova
> Review result: Ready
> 
> This document specifies a mechanism enabling enterprise SIP
> networks to request a set of operational parameters from a SIP
> provider. The resulting list of parameters can be used to automate
> the configuration of the SIP peering interface between the
> enterprise and the SIP provider networks.
> 
> This document is notably clear and easy to understand, even for
> those less familiar with SIP.  I would specifically commend the
> authors for clearly explaining the terminology and providing
> corresponding references.
> 
> The proposed mechanism seems to be rather useful for operating SIP
> networks, especially as it promotes automation and reduces chances
> of human errors.
> 
> I believe the document is ready for publication. I do not really
> have any comments, except for two minor questions (more for my own
> curiousity) and a few
> nits:
> 
> Questions, both related to Section 5:
> 
> 1. is it intentional that "recommended" is a lower-case?
> 
> 2. With my limited SIP background, I apologize if this is an
> obvious question, but..
> 
> Could a SIP operator ever make a change to the capability set that
> would demand an update to enterprise networks faster than the
> current predefined interval allows, or is that scenario highly
> improbable?  If such scenario is possible, was the possibility of
> including the recommended polling frequency within the capability
> set itself considered?
> 
> Nits:
> 
> Section 2.1
> "Call Control within a telephony networks refers to software that
> is responsible for delivering its core functionality. "
> 
> Does "its" in "its core functionality" refers to "telephony
> network"? I guess so, but I found that phrase a  bit hard to
> parse, so maybe "for delivering the core telephony functions" or
> smth like that?
> 
> Section 2.3
> 
> "The capability set document is constructed according the
> guidelines of the YANG model described in this draft."
> 
> I think it should be 'according to the guidelines':
> "The capability set document is constructed according to the
> guidelines of the YANG model described in this draft."
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPS-DIR mailing list -- [e-mail] To unsubscribe send an
> email to [e-mail]
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.