[Speermint] Fwd: opsdir review of draft-ietf-speermint-architecture-17.txt

Hi,

please, note the following review on the general IETF list. The IESG
will be discussing this draft on February 3rd.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: opsdir review of draft-ietf-speermint-architecture-17.txt
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:38:05 +0100
From: Bert (IETF) Wijnen <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
To: Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com
<Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>,	d.malas@cablelabs.com
<d.malas@cablelabs.com>
CC: ops-dir@ietf.org <ops-dir@ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org >>
"ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>

I was appointed to review this document from an OPS-DIR point of
vie, i,e, to check for operational or management aspects.

This are is not my space of expertise, so don't rely too much on my
report.

I think that there might be some operational aspects in the sense that
sometimes secure/encrypted connections are needed and other times it may be
OK to use unencrypted connections if they are inside the same secure
building.
So is there not something for an operator to configure in such cases?

typo:

Section 4, 4th bullet, 2nd sub bullet:

       *  LUF can communicator with SF and SBE

     s/cator/cate/

Section 5.1.1.2 2nd para:

    If an im: or pres: URI is chosen based on an "E2U+im" [RFC3861] or
    "E2U+pres" [RFC3953] enumserver, the SSP follows the procedures for
    resolving these URIs to URIs for specific protocols such a SIP or
    XMPP as described in the previous section.

    s/such a SIP/such as SIP/

Bert Wijnen

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf