Re: [Stox] I-D Action: draft-ietf-stox-groupchat-06.txt

Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com> Wed, 15 October 2014 20:58 UTC

Return-Path: <saul@ag-projects.com>
X-Original-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: stox@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABEEE1ACD46 for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:58:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.011
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, J_CHICKENPOX_18=0.6, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3] autolearn=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 m1Vl06LrO1EI for <stox@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:58:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sipthor.net (node16.dns-hosting.info [81.23.228.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 582071ACD45 for <stox@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:58:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.99.53] (i19025.upc-i.chello.nl [62.195.19.25]) by mail.sipthor.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4258C16DC6B2; Wed, 15 Oct 2014 22:58:12 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1DD85701-973D-474B-9F71-F21D44A7FF1F"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Saúl Ibarra Corretgé <saul@ag-projects.com>
In-Reply-To: <5437D74B.3090001@andyet.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 22:57:58 +0200
Message-Id: <0BE57976-EDFC-4BA6-B79E-91917DF1C458@ag-projects.com>
References: <20141010051523.13935.37841.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5437D74B.3090001@andyet.net>
To: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/stox/l-W49MobNcKpFnEDnjk6XjfRZmo
Cc: stox@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Stox] I-D Action: draft-ietf-stox-groupchat-06.txt
X-BeenThere: stox@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 20:58:15 -0000

On 10 Oct 2014, at 14:55, Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net> wrote:

> This was my attempt to address Ben Campbell's feedback on architecture, which necessitated changes to all the protocol flows and examples, too.
> 
> Reviews would be appreciated. :-)
> 

Thanks for getting back to this!

Some observations:

In example 3,c an we ditch ";automata;message;event=“conference””? The only thing that matters is “is focus” and the rest might just add confusion, specially the “event=‘conference’” part.

We have been using “SIP-to-XMPP” and “XMPP-to-SIP” all along, but now some sections make the distinction and a new "XMPP-to-MSRP” thing appears. Do we want to make this distinction all across or just in the architecture section? For the purpose of gatewaying, SIP and MSRP go together, even if technically they can be different entities. To be clear, the only thing that sounds a bit weird to me is “XMPP-to-MSRP”.

Section 5.8: typo: “focsu”.

Example 27: add “nickname private-messages” to a=chatroom

Example 28: I’d say “SIP-to-XMPP gateway acks session”


Other that these minor issues it LGTM!


Cheers,

--
Saúl Ibarra Corretgé
AG Projects