Re: [sipcore] Verify draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc4244bis-callflows-02.txt

Hi Brett;

 Thanks for further comments. 

My comments inline.

On Feb 9, 2013, at 11:50 AM, Brett Tate wrote:

> Howdy,
> 
> Most of my comments have been adequately addressed.
> 
> Thanks,
> Brett
> 
> -----
> 
> Concerning my various comments to include Max-Forwards, the values are good enough for me; however I was surprised to see some of the decrementing and initial values.  For instance, section 3.1 F5 and F13 contain initial values within ACK reflecting the related INVITE instead of 70.  And for instance, section 3.1 F6 and F9 reflect the proxy decrementing the value again for INVITE sent to new location because of 302 or timeout.

My bad. Will fix these. 

> 
> If not intentional, the figure labels are of the format "Figure 1: Figure 1." and not consistently located (i.e. before or after detailed messages).

I will fix these as well. 

> 
> Section 3.2 F3: top Via received should be on the second via.

Thanks for the catch. Done. 

> 
> Section 3.4 picture: 302 ACK arrow reflection wrong source.  The same applies to sections 3.6 and 3.7.

Thanks. Done.

> 
> Concerning http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sipcore/current/msg05265.html comment 2, section 3.5 was not modified; thus I'll assume that the transport switch from UDP to TCP was intentional (i.e. registered UDP Contact but INVITE sent over TCP).

I must have overlooked this.. Fixed. 

> 
> Section 3.9 F2: Added Max-Forwards to response.

Thanks. Fixed.

Regards
 Shida

> 
> New comment (if want to address): figure 1 indicates a "retransmit INVITE" with arrow after having received a 180. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sipcore mailing list
> sipcore@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore