Re: [stir] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-stir-rfc4474bis-15: (with COMMENT)

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Nov 3, 2016, at 02:29 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
> On 3 Nov 2016, at 9:16, Peterson, Jon wrote:
> 
> >
> >>
> >>> On 2 Nov 2016, at 23:38, Ben Campbell <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> -6.2.2: This section recommends specific result code reason phrases 
> >>> for
> >>> a
> >>> couple of circumstances. I assume the idea is that one should use a
> >>> "helpful" reason phrase, and these are examples of phrases helpful 
> >>> for
> >>> the circumstances. But it reads as if you mean to standardize those
> >>> specific reason phrases.  If the intent is really to offer examples,
> >>> please clarify. I'd hate to see us back in the days of commonly 
> >>> seeing
> >>> SIP code break due to unexpected reason phrases.
> >>
> >> This essentially a better version of my comment.
> >
> > Well, agreed on that last point. We can soften the language here. What 
> > we
> > wanted to do is to differentiate conditions that are signaled by the 
> > same
> > reason code, and to use new reason codes sparingly. The rough 
> > guideline I
> > use is that programmatic behavior has to trigger off the codes only, 
> > but
> > human behavior can rely on the reason phrases. We're not asking an
> > automaton to react to "Stale Date" or "Use Supported PASSporT Format," 
> > say.
> 
> Softening the language would make me happier. I note that elsewhere in 
> this draft (and also in 4474), there are similar statements that use 
> "For example,..."

I would like this as well.