[Sip] Rev of draft-ietf-sip-rph-new-namespaces-04
"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Tue, 21 October 2008 21:58 UTC
Return-Path: <sip-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: sip-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-sip-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 062083A6BC0; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:58:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E3A3A6BBF for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:58:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.033, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1mpZm5364QBg for <sip@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 154023A6BBA for <sip@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 14:58:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,460,1220227200"; d="scan'208";a="25216227"
Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Oct 2008 21:59:11 +0000
Received: from rtp-core-2.cisco.com (rtp-core-2.cisco.com [64.102.124.13]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m9LLxB8U025081; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:59:11 -0400
Received: from xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-201.cisco.com [64.102.31.12]) by rtp-core-2.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m9LLxBVD029484; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:59:11 GMT
Received: from xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.38]) by xbh-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:59:11 -0400
Received: from jmpolk-wxp01.cisco.com ([10.82.255.197]) by xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:59:10 -0400
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:59:09 -0500
To: sip@ietf.org
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <XFE-RTP-201EB4HGXAw0000072c@xfe-rtp-201.amer.cisco.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Oct 2008 21:59:10.0962 (UTC) FILETIME=[3F8F9520:01C933C8]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=541; t=1224626351; x=1225490351; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jmpolk@cisco.com; z=From:=20=22James=20M.=20Polk=22=20<jmpolk@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Rev=20of=20draft-ietf-sip-rph-new-namespaces-04 |Sender:=20 |To:=20sip@ietf.org; bh=9u8L6zcv5LMhn+2DuSketTUEc9iHA6gFmjb4ZIH30Bo=; b=ICM0udWDCCNHMUP7WrFw85IMNrEq5N7AVnweHG46EhOMpC01J9OtDJnNbk 4HZseVlZ2+t7vtUW8NCAe3oU7kRxftT0AGqjd73HAwbyT6/fJWk+GYLAmxfd Jhy8ybtKni;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1; header.From=jmpolk@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/rtpdkim1001 verified; );
Cc: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Subject: [Sip] Rev of draft-ietf-sip-rph-new-namespaces-04
X-BeenThere: sip@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Session Initiation Protocol <sip.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sip@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip>, <mailto:sip-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: sip-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: sip-bounces@ietf.org
SIP WG I've just revved http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sip-rph-new-namespaces-04.txt I made some small fixes that shouldn't have made it through the last version, and corrected a larger mistaken - a poorly written paraphrase of section 8 of RFC 4412 (dealing with the relative priority order defined in that RFC). I simply deleted that paraphrasing, instead referring specifically to section 8 of RFC 4412. This ID is getting reviewed by the IESG on this Thursday's call. Comments are welcome James _______________________________________________ Sip mailing list https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sipping@ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
- [Sip] Rev of draft-ietf-sip-rph-new-namespaces-04 James M. Polk