IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sipcore] AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-sipcore-name-addr-guidance-01

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Tue, 16 May 2017 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sipcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0120126BF3; Tue, 16 May 2017 14:49:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.821
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.821 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L_B8ViBEov9Q; Tue, 16 May 2017 14:49:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18A0912EC56; Tue, 16 May 2017 14:45:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unescapeable.local ([66.171.169.35]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v4GLj4pn069690 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 16 May 2017 16:45:05 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [66.171.169.35] claimed to be unescapeable.local
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, draft-ietf-sipcore-name-addr-guidance.all@ietf.org, sipcore@ietf.org
References: <FF4A659A-A2AD-4823-9004-2222557E625D@nostrum.com> <671DFB4B-8B03-4644-9A9E-156B6342B9D3@nostrum.com>
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <52c054d6-95ad-9e56-37df-80aa670e51b9@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 17:44:59 -0400
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.12; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <671DFB4B-8B03-4644-9A9E-156B6342B9D3@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------DA26925174475E48C6DC6A08"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sipcore/ONPhM_NkWTBWysKtmlnWz8pQB70>
Subject: Re: [sipcore] AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-sipcore-name-addr-guidance-01
X-BeenThere: sipcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Core Working Group <sipcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/sipcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:sipcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipcore>, <mailto:sipcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 21:50:00 -0000

The document needs to have that added. (Brian called that out in section 
11 of the writeup).

At the time he asked me about it, I suggested I fix _after_ your AD 
review, to get your comments at the same time.

Do you want me to revise this before IETFLC or deal with it when 
handling other IETFLC comments?

(It won't be hard to add).

RjS


On 5/16/17 5:35 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> Well, I take that back--I do have one comment/question:
>
> There is no 2119 boilerplate. I assume this is because all the 2119 
> keywords are in updates to other documents, which should hopefully 
> have their own 2119 boilerplate? I'm on the fence about whether is 
> should still be included here--was it a conscious decision to leave it 
> out?
>
> (Notice that I am not asking about the downrefs :-) )
>
> Thanks!
>
> Ben.
>
> On May 16, 2017, at 5:27 PM, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com 
> <mailto:ben@nostrum.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is my AD Evaluation of draft-ietf-sipcore-name-addr-guidance-01. 
>> I have no comments for a change :-) I will kick off IETF LC shortly.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Ben.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email