Re: [Stox] I-D Action: draft-ietf-stox-7248bis-09.txt

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com> Mon, 12 September 2016 09:42 UTC

Return-Path: <saul@ag-projects.com>
X-Original-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B8CD12B1DB for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 02:42:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kO3iX8iCHfpV for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 02:42:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sipthor.net (node16.dns-hosting.info [81.23.228.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A88C12B1E0 for <stox@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 02:42:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.11] (unknown [51.179.151.35]) by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3552814AC05D; Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:42:33 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A4CA0D0E-0E57-4E86-9BF5-CDDBA8C71F3F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
X-Pgp-Agent: GPGMail
From: =?utf-8?Q?Sa=C3=BAl_Ibarra_Corretg=C3=A9?= <saul@ag-projects.com>
In-Reply-To: <5FA29740-BCD2-402D-BEB1-417A66CA7603@ag-projects.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 10:42:44 +0100
Message-Id: <81A30B28-EEDE-4BF2-8BA1-7CD148DF7ECE@ag-projects.com>
References: <147241625250.24476.13333521107304467910.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <a139f13c-9745-0d86-853b-d5d6b8c9124c@stpeter.im> <E1C65C7E-CDFF-40BC-AF01-B2F029B64E6E@nostrum.com> <931fcd90-11c8-0b58-b3ad-eb6e7be2557e@stpeter.im> <f12534a1-bdce-925f-3358-c22975dd3bbe@stpeter.im> <512b8d52-68e1-2bdd-d153-20e24fbb73de@stpeter.im> <B197ACCC-5DB0-4C8F-8C54-1159A89B1796@nostrum.com> <969223de-c09e-eba5-a4a3-4969539c807e@stpeter.im> <87BE83BB-946B-4833-A34C-D890E783F214@nostrum.com> <76151e8b-9abf-7587-c36d-e2bf38180245@stpeter.im> <0C304BC3-0AD3-48C4-958B-AC44122892D7@nostrum.com> <5FA29740-BCD2-402D-BEB1-417A66CA7603@ag-projects.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stox/NnurOH86wZAaA2H9oBxPj7c3xMU>
Cc: stox@ietf.org, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Subject: Re: [Stox] I-D Action: draft-ietf-stox-7248bis-09.txt
X-BeenThere: stox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP-TO-XMPP Working Group discussion list <stox.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/stox/>
List-Post: <mailto:stox@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/stox>, <mailto:stox-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 09:42:40 -0000

Review time!

Page 10: " As described in Section 6
, the XMPP-to-SIP gateway also generates a
   presence notification addressed to the XMPP user:
“

Should we say “if the NOTIFY contains a body” or is it obvious enough? It’s possible the SIP user is offline, but the XMPP is user is already authorised, so the NOTIFY will contain Subscription-State: active, but no body.

Page 11: "As can be seen, because SIMPLE does not
   have a construct that enables a contact to cancel her presence
   authorization,”

There is: remove the user from the corresponding XCAP rule.  Next time presence is requested, it will be denied.  (the SUBSCRIBE dialog still needs to be terminated though).

Page 14: example 10

Since the Content-Length is 0, maybe omit Content-Type?

Page 15: flow example

Add a NOTIFY with state as “pending” before sending the subscribe stanza to the XMPP server?

Page 19: [RFC6121] defines how XMPP

Missing RFC link?

Page 27: " As described in [RFC3856
], this cancels any notification dialog but
   causes a NOTIFY to be sent to the subscriber, just as a presence
   probe does (the transformation rules for presence notifications have
   been previously described in
Section 6.2 of this document).”

A probe would be implemented as a new SUBSCRIBE dialog with expires 0, which does’t cancel all other dialogs.  So while the mechanism is the same, using a *new* SUBSCRIBE request with Expires: 0 would just be a probe, not a cancellation.

General note: the examples with "<show xmlns='jabber:client'>away</show>” lack the XML namespace declaration for “jabber”.


These are all quite minor things, I think we are good to go for WGLC after small fixes for those.


Cheers!

--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects