I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Document: draft-andreasen-sipping-rfc3603bis-07.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 2008-12-24 IETF LC End Date: 2009-01-10 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Comments: some minor editorial concerns (i.e, to be fixed bt the RFC Editor): - Abstract page 2: please remove (SIP) [RFC3261] (the Abstract is an autonomous text, the abbrev is not used so is useless, etc) - ToC page 3: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments - 1 page 5: this is the right place to introduce the SIP abbrev, i.e., SIP -> Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) [RFC3261] - 2 page 6: the DCS abbrev is never introduced - 5 page 10: the UAC abbrev is not introduced, IMHO you should find a way to introduce UAC and UAS abbrevs in 3 (Trust Boundary). - 5.1 page 11: .The trace-param -> . The trace-param - 8 page 25: ccc-id -> cccid (for uniformity) - 8.3 page 28: The UAC may also include a P-DCS-Redirect header. -> The UAC MAY also include a P-DCS-Redirect header. (IMHO according to the context this should be the uppercase keyword) - 8.5 page 28: .Otherwise, -> . Otherwise, - 12 page 37: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments - 12 page 37: Tung- Hai -> Tung-Hai ? - 13.2 page 38: please use the long names for months (first 4 entries) Don't forget you have expert review and IANA comments in the ID tracker. Regards francis.dup...@fdupont.fr PS: I don't comment about the lawful interception stuff. _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
