Re: [sipcore] [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sipcore-locparam-04

[Alissa Cooper <[e-mail]>]

Ines, thanks for your review. Roland, thanks for your response. I entered a No Objection ballot.

Alissa


> On Jan 29, 2020, at 5:25 PM, Ines Robles <mariainesrobles=[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Roland,
> 
> Thank you for addressing my comments. I agree with them.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Ines.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 8:50 AM <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> Hi Ines,
> Thank you for your review.
> I have incoperated your comments within the draft.
> 
> On Question 1 In Section 1 I have changed the last paragraph by adding the reference of RF64412 as follows:
>  " This document extends the Geolocation header field of RFC6442, by allowing an entity adding the locationValue to identity itself using a hostname. This is done by defining a new geoloc-param header field parameter,
> 
> Hope this is OK for you.
> 
> Question 2: It is difficult to reference the various architectures for emergency since each country, based on national regulation rules, may have it's own architecture. 
> 
> Question 3: This apply to the rules defined in RFC6442 in Section 4.4.
> 
> Best Regards
> 
> Roland
> 
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Ines Robles via Datatracker <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> 
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 26. Januar 2020 23:29
> An: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Cc: [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>; sipcore@ietf..org <mailto:[e-mail]>; [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
> Betreff: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-sipcore-locparam-04
> 
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review result: Ready with Nits
> 
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> 
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>>.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-sipcore-locparam-04
> Reviewer: Ines Robles
> Review Date: 2020-01-26
> IETF LC End Date: 2020-01-27
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> 
> Summary:
> 
> This document proposes for SIP protocol, a new geolocation parameter, the location-source ("loc-src"), so that an entity adding the locationValue to Geolocation header field can identify itself using its hostname.
> 
> The document does not present major issues. I have some minor questions/suggestions at the end.
> 
> Major issues: Not found
> 
> Minor issues: Not found
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> 
> Section 4: "A UA MUST..." it would be nice to expand UA "A User Agent (UA) MUST..."
> 
> Questions/Suggestions:
> 
> 1- Section 1: I think it would be nice to add explicitly "This document updates
> 6442 by extending the Geolocation header field..."
> 
> 2- Section 3:  where it states "There are various architectures defined f...Each has it own characteristics with corresponding pros and cons....." I think it would be nice to add a reference/s to it.
> 
> 3- Which Geolocation-Error codes correspond to the situation when the "loc-scr"
> field presents some error, or one LocationValue presents two "loc-src" fields and the locationValue in both cases is correct?
> 
> Thank you for this document,
> 
> Ines.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art