Re: [sipcore] Draft new version: draft-ietf-sipcore-keep-06

[Christer Holmberg <[e-mail]>]

Hi Paul,

I can change it when I do whatever changes will be required by the IESG review.

Regards,

Christer

________________________________________
From: Paul Kyzivat [[e-mail]]
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 4:48 PM
To: Christer Holmberg
Cc: SIPCORE (Session Initiation Protocol Core) WG; Adam Roach
Subject: Re: Draft new version: draft-ietf-sipcore-keep-06

Christer Holmberg wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
>> I think this addresses all of my issues!
>>
>> I have one question on some new text introduced in section 4.1:
>>
>>     In general, it can be useful for SIP entities to indicate willingness
>>     to send keep-alives, even if they are not aware of any
>>     necessity for them to send keep-alives, since the adjacent downstream SIP entity
>>     might have knowledge about the necessity.  Similarly, it can be
>>     useful for SIP entities to indicate willingness to receive keep-
>>     alives, even if they are not aware of any necessity for the adjacent
>>     upstream SIP entity to send them.
>>
>> Am I missing something? I don't see any way for an entity to
>> indicate willingness to receive keep-alives if the upstream
>> neighbor hasn't indicated a willingness to send them.
>
> It DOES require that the upstream has indicated willingess to send them. I guess that could be clarified (<new></new>).
>
> "Similarly, <new>if the adjacent upstream SIP entity has indicated willingess to send keep-alives,</new> it can be
> useful for SIP entities to indicate willingness to receive keep-alives, even if they are not aware of any necessity for the adjacent
> upstream SIP entity to send them."

OK, for me that helps. Its no big deal if it stays as it is - it just
seemed a little confusing.

        Thanks,
        Paul