[sipcore] Additional editorial suggestions (was Re: WGLC: draft-ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance)

[Robert Sparks <[e-mail]>]

Hi document editors -

Here are a few additional suggestions that are purely editorial that I think would 
make the document stronger - please consider them, but its up to you whether to 
do anything with them.

a) I suggest "your favorite local pizza delivery service" instead of "Pizza Hut"

b) Replace 'The only conceivable way forward, when a second location is placed into
the same SIP request by a SIP intermediary is to take a "you break it, you bought it" philosophy
with respect to the inserting SIP intermediary' with 'This document takes a "you break it, you bought it"
approach to dealing with second locations placed into a SIP request by an intermediary entity.'

c) Delete the parenthetical '(we are not going to discuss any other reasons in this document, and
there are many)'. That's obvious and distracts from the point.

d) Replace 'SIP intermediaries are NOT RECOMMENDED to modify existing locationValue(s),
and further not to delete any either' with 'SIP intermediaries SHOULD NOT modify or remove any
existing locationValue(s).'

e) Replace the first sentence of the paragraph at the end of page 10 with
'A Geolocation-Routing header-value that is set to "no" has no special security properties. It is
at most a request for behavior within SIP intermediaries.'

f) Replace 'SIP intermediaries MUST NOT add, modify or delete the location in a 424 response.'
with 'SIP intermediaries that are forwarding (as opposed to generating) a 424 response MUST
NOT add, modify, or delete any location appearing in that response.'

g) Delete the '- etc...' bullet in the non-exclusive list of reasons for 1XX in section 4.4
 
h) Delete 'At this time,' in the paragraph after that list. This document won''t alter things at
any other time either. 

i) Replace "This was first brought up in section 3.2." with "The end of section 3.2 discusses
how transaction timing considerations lead to this requirement."


RjS



On Feb 28, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Adam Roach - SIPCORE Chair wrote:

> [as chair]
> 
> The current editor of draft-ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance believes that the document has no remaining technical issues[1], and is ready for evaluation. Today, we are starting a two-week working group last call period. This last call period ends on Tuesday, March 15th.
> 
> The latest version of the document can be retrieved here:
> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sipcore-location-conveyance
> 
> Any comments on the document should be sent to the SIPCORE mailing list.
> 
> /a
> 
> [1] John Elwell's editorial comments of February 25th have been noted by the authors, and will be treated as WGLC comments.