[sipcore] Comments on draft-ietf-sipcore-sec-flows-05

[Gonzalo Camarillo <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

a few days ago, I received a publication request for the following draft:

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-sipcore-sec-flows-05.txt

Please, find below a few minor comments on the draft.

Cheers,

Gonzalo


References use the following convention (RFC 5246 [12]). The current
recommendation is to use [RFC5246] instead. Something like this should
work in xml2rfc:

  <?rfc symrefs="yes"?>

Once you are at it, you may want to also add the following:

  <?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
  <?rfc subcompact="no" ?>

Add a reference for ASN.1 and X.509

Expand acronyms on their first use (e.g., UA and EKU).

Page 28. The word "Section" needs to be capitalized when referring to
particular sections (e.g., Section 6 of RFC 5280).

Page 28. Some paragraphs contain pointers to the relevant normative
behavior as defined in other RFCs. However, some paragraphs do not
have those pointers. For example:

  Some SIP clients incorrectly only do SSLv3 and do not support TLS.

  Many SIP clients were found to accept expired certificates with no
  warning or error.


In the next paragraph, add a reference to Section 3.2 of RFC 5621:

   Some implementations used binary MIME encodings while others used
   base64.  It is advisable that implementations send only binary and
   are prepared to receive either.