[stir] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-stir-rfc4474bis-15: (with COMMENT)

["Alexey Melnikov" <[e-mail]>]

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-stir-rfc4474bis-15: 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-stir-rfc4474bis/



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

This is a well written document (despite giving too many deployment
choices in some areas). I have a short list of small issues/nits:

In Section 4: ABNF for the signed-identity-digest allows empty string? Is
this intentional? If not, maybe use "1*" in front?

In Section 5.1: are you missing an empty line between the header and the
SDP payload?

In Section 6.2.2: is it customary in SIP to use the human readable
portion of error responses?

In Section 7.4: HTTP URIs need a reference.

In Section 8.4: URI-ID from RFC 6125 can be used for the subdomain case
as well?