[siprec] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-siprec-callflows-07: (with COMMENT)

"Stephen Farrell" <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Thu, 01 December 2016 14:12 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <148060156260.10434.142534456730276810.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 06:12:42 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/siprec/vCUGE2QGMb0TD17W2s5JA-Tvu5A>
Cc: siprec@ietf.org, andrew.hutton@unify.com, draft-ietf-siprec-callflows@ietf.org, siprec-chairs@ietf.org
Subject: [siprec] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-ietf-siprec-callflows-07: (with COMMENT)

Stephen Farrell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-siprec-callflows-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-siprec-callflows/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------


One of the SIPREC security issues we had to deal with was
getting agreement that commensurate security mechanisms need
to be used for calls and related recording sessions. It's a
pity that none of the flows included here demonstrate that
aspect. In particular, a set of calls that do not have
commensurate security settings might otherwise map to 1 RS,
which I think (not 100% sure) could affect the flows shown
in 3.4.

[siprec] Stephen Farrell's No Objection on draft-… Stephen Farrell