[Sipping] Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6-torture-tests-01.txt
"Mahendran, AC" <mahendra@qualcomm.com> Fri, 06 April 2007 19:37 UTC
Return-path: <sipping-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZuFw-0003VX-61; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:37:56 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZuFu-0003SM-SZ for sipping@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:37:54 -0400
Received: from ithilien.qualcomm.com ([129.46.51.59]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZuFs-0001l2-8o for sipping@ietf.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2007 15:37:54 -0400
Received: from totoro.qualcomm.com (totoro.qualcomm.com [129.46.61.158]) by ithilien.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.12.5/1.0) with ESMTP id l36JbjoF016052 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Fri, 6 Apr 2007 12:37:46 -0700
Received: from SANEXCAS03.na.qualcomm.com (sanexcas03.qualcomm.com [172.30.32.65]) by totoro.qualcomm.com (8.13.6/8.13.6/1.0) with ESMTP id l36JbjAU018582; Fri, 6 Apr 2007 12:37:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAEX07.na.qualcomm.com ([129.46.133.195]) by SANEXCAS03.na.qualcomm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 6 Apr 2007 12:37:45 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 12:37:43 -0700
Message-ID: <90D469E18343DE47961207F6851040B30188A91C@NAEX07.na.qualcomm.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6-torture-tests-01.txt
Thread-Index: Acd4gwvcenSXGALXSBa4xkH9OPRe0A==
From: "Mahendran, AC" <mahendra@qualcomm.com>
To: sipping@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Apr 2007 19:37:45.0319 (UTC) FILETIME=[0CBE3770:01C77883]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 057ebe9b96adec30a7efb2aeda4c26a4
Cc: ac@qualcomm.com, mary.barnes@nortel.com
Subject: [Sipping] Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6-torture-tests-01.txt
X-BeenThere: sipping@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "SIPPING Working Group \(applications of SIP\)" <sipping.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:sipping@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping>, <mailto:sipping-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: sipping-bounces@ietf.org
Hi Vijay, Here are my comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6-torture-tests-01.txt. 1) In section 3, text: "This document does not, however, address these issues. Instead, a companion document [ID.sip-trans] provides more guidance on these." It would good to complete the sentence by appending "issues" to the end of the sentence. 2) In 4.3, text: "Consider the REGISTER request below. The sender of the request intended to specify a port number (5070) to contact a server, but inadvertently, put the port number inside the closing "]" of the IPv6 reference. " s/put/puts (or inserts) 3) Sections 4.3/4.4 mention about the (un)/ambiguous ports in Request-URI. This, however, applies to other headers (e.g., Via header [in sent-by production rule], and the Contact header) as well. If possible, can we mention that in the description? 4) General comment (applies to the entire doc): Intent of "Message Details" is not clear. It would be good include a small description on the intent of "Message Details" field. It is descriptive in some examples (e.g., "ipv6-good", "ipv6-bad" etc), whereas, it does not mean much in others (e.g., "param1", "param2" etc). Note: I see it being used in RFC 4475, but there is no description in that document too. 5) In Section 4.4, text: "Message Details: port-umabiguous" s/umabiguous/unambiguous Also, the spelling needs to be fixed in the title of the section as well. 6) In section 4.6, Text: o=assistant 971731711378798081 0 IN IP6 2001:db8::20 s=Live video feed for today's meeting c=IN IP6 2001:db8::1 Is there are reason why you made the IPv6 address in the "o=" line different from the "c=" line? If not, it'd be better to make them the same. 7) In section 4.5, Text: OPTIONS sip:[2001:db8::10] SIP/2.0 To: sip:user@example.com From: sip:user@example.com;tag=81x2 <allOneLine> Via: SIP/2.0/UDP [2001:db8::9:1];received=2001:db8::9:255; branch=z9hG4bKas3 </allOneLine> Call-ID: SSG95523997077@hlau_4100 Max-Forwards: 70 Contact: "Caller" <sip:caller@[2001:db8::1]> CSeq: 921 OPTIONS Content-Length: 0 The IPv6 address in the "Contact" header is different from the address in the "Via" header e.g., "9" is missing from the address in the Contact header. If this intentional, it would be good to note it in the description. The same comment applies to the examples in sections 4.6 and 4.8. 8) In section 4.7, Text: BYE sip:user@host.example.com SIP/2.0 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP [2001:db8::9:1]:6050;branch=z9hG4bKas3-111 Via: SIP/2.0/UDP 192.0.2.1;branch=z9hG4bKjhja8781hjuaij65144 <allOneLine> Via: SIP/2.0/TCP [2001:db8::9:255];branch=z9hG4bK451jj; received=192.0.2.200 </allOneLine> Call-ID: 997077@lau_4100 Max-Forwards: 70 CSeq: 89187 BYE To: sip:user@example.net;tag=9817--94 From: sip:user@example.com;tag=81x2 Content-Length: 0 The "To" header contains the domain "example.net" but the Request-URI contains "example.com". While this is possible, I think it'd be better to make both these domains the same (e.g., example.net). Thanks, AC _______________________________________________ Sipping mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP Use sip-implementors@cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use sip@ietf.org for new developments of core SIP
- [Sipping] Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6-tor… B, Nataraju
- [Sipping] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6… Vijay K. Gurbani
- [Sipping] Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6-tor… Mahendran, AC
- [Sipping] Re: Comments on draft-ietf-sipping-ipv6… Vijay K. Gurbani