Re: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-chat-17.txt

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com> Mon, 26 November 2012 11:37 UTC

Return-Path: <saul@ag-projects.com>
X-Original-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: simple@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1983821F84DA for <simple@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 03:37:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.688
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.688 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qMXlc9KmB6Nx for <simple@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 03:37:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.sipthor.net (node06.dns-hosting.info [85.17.186.6]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F2821F8482 for <simple@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 03:37:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix, from userid 5001) id 7D5F3B35DC; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:37:54 +0100 (CET)
Received: from imac.saghul.lan (ip3e830637.speed.planet.nl [62.131.6.55]) by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3668EB00F7; Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:37:41 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com>
In-Reply-To: <50A7BBA9.7040904@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:37:40 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <85840D19-69E5-44A4-A24A-E078E45FB13E@ag-projects.com>
References: <20121117160611.10411.74381.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <50A7BBA9.7040904@ericsson.com>
To: "Miguel A. Garcia" <Miguel.A.Garcia@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085)
Cc: simple@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Simple] I-D Action: draft-ietf-simple-chat-17.txt
X-BeenThere: simple@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP for Instant Messaging and Presence Leveraging Extensions <simple.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/simple>, <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/simple>
List-Post: <mailto:simple@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple>, <mailto:simple-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 11:37:57 -0000

Hi,

On Nov 17, 2012, at 5:30 PM, Miguel A. Garcia wrote:

> Hi:
> 
> So, the long awaited version -17 of the MSRP chat draft has been posted. This version addresses all the comments received in the IESG review and various directorates that also took a look at the draft. Among others, these are the most relevant changes.
> 
> - Added definitions of "identifier" and "to log in".
> - New Section 4.1 lists all the Policy Attributes of the chat room in a single section.
> - Clarified that congestion can occur due to the chat room application or due to some other application.
> - Clarified that the MSRP switch should learn the recipient's capabilities through the 'accept-wrapped-types' in SDP. Procedures as for what to do if the MSRP switch is aware that a recipient does not support a given media type.
> - Quite a few clarifications around chunked messages. It was clarified when the MSRP switch has to delete the temporarily stored state. Also, how to deal with situations where the connection is broken before the reception of the last chunk.
> - Added a length limit to MSRP nicknames: they must be between 1 and 1023 octets, after UTF-8 encoding.
> - Fixed a bug: the error result code is 425 rather than 423 in the examples.
> - Added more security considerations around the usage of TLS, policies to preserve a nickname once the use logs off, confusable nicknames, rendering of nicknames that contain scripts or code, and anonymity when using TLS with certificates.
> 
> From the authors' perspective, we believe the draft is ready. I will contact the IESG members to verify that the current version satisfies their comments.
> 

I'm ok with this version. A couple of minor editorial comments though:

In sec 4.1: "Chunk reception timer:   The value of a time that" -> "The value of a timer that"

In sec 6.2 "whether a message was not deliver" -> "whether a message was not delivered"


Regards,

--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects