Re: [sipcore] draft-ietf-sipcore-keep - Peter's comments

[Peter Musgrave <[e-mail]>]

All ok with me.

Thanks,

Peter

On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Christer Holmberg
<[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>>>4.4 para 2. This paragraph is one sentence. I read it many times - I
>>>>gave up.
>>>
>>>I tried to make the paragraph more readable. It still
>>>contain a long sentence, but please let me know if it's
>>>easier to understand now:
>>>
>>>        "When a SIP entity creates or receives a response, and the
>>>        adjacent downstream SIP entity that sent the associated request
>>>        indicated willingness to send keep-alives, if the SIP entity
>>>        is willing to receive keep-alives associated with the registration
>>>        (in case of a REGISTER response), or the dialog (in case of a
>>>        response to an initial request for a dialog, or a response to a mid-dialog
>>>        target refresh request), from the adjacent downstream SIP entity it MUST
>>>        add a parameter value to the "keep" parameter, before sending
>>>        or forwarding the response. The parameter can contain a recommended keep-alive
>>>        frequency, or a zero value."
>>>
>>Better - but I am still getting a stack overflow since I parse "When... A or B ..and...if..or.."
>
> You should take a look at some 3GPP specifications :)
>
>>How about:
>>
>>If a request from a downstream SIP element indicated support
>>for keep-alives and the upstream element also supports
>>keep-alives then the response from the upstream element MUST
>>contain a parameter value for the "keep". This value can
>>contain a recommended keep-alive value or a zero value.
>>
>>(I have cut out the stuff on what kind of request it is - I
>>am not sure if this distinction was vital?)
>
> I think it is important to indicate the "scope" (registration or dialog) for which the entity
> Indicates willingess to receive keep-alives.
>
> I guess the "in case of..." parts could be removed.
>
> Also, the "the response from the upstream element" is a little confusing, because it seems to refer to some other entity (the "reference point" in the text is the SIP entity that inserts the value in the keep header). I would like to use "the SIP entity", as elsewhere in the document.
>
> Regards,
>
> Christer