Re: [Sip] -resource-priority-05.txt: Comments and Recommendations (1)

In a message dated 11/15/2004 11:39:06 PM W. Europe Standard Time, 
jmpolk@cisco.com writes:

> >The .03 draft (and I think also the .04 draft) had a paragraph that said
> >    "Namespaces do not describe how they relate to other existing
> >    namespaces, as each namespace is independent of other registrations."
> >
> >It doesn't seem to be in .05
> 
> see (the new) section 7.1 about the warnings of multiple namespaces
> 

I don't read anything in 7.1 as saying what the previous versions said. What 
I think is needed is a very clear statement something like "neither this 
document nor namespaces specify the interrelationship or interworking between 
namespaces, such as mapping from one namespace to another at domain boundaries". 
That was my understanding of the previous agreement.

As a result, the first bullet in Section 7.1, which states "There MUST be one 
order of priorities a SIP element has to process to", while talking about 
multiple namespaces in a message, seems to be wrong (or misunderstood), since it 
seems to require something about the relationship. In fact the example 
following this bullet list is trying to say something about the "acceptable" ways 
that the SIP element may process multiple namespaces. The part about what is "not 
acceptable" is not needed. The examples of incorrect order within each 
individual namespace are not allowed even without multiple namespaces.

Since the document should say that it does not address interworking between 
namespaces, it should not contain this material.

I don't know what the second bullet is trying to say.

The third bullet is obvious, I thought, according to the rules of SIP. If 
not, this statement could be worded better.

Section 7.1 should be deleted completely and replaced with a single statement 
something like I proposed above.

( I guess this will start a long series of e-mails on what I find wrong in 
-05.)

Mike Pierce