> On Jul 12, 2016, at 7:41 AM 7/12/16, Christer Holmberg > <christer.holmb...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > Hi Ralph, > > Thanks for your comments! Please see inline. > > Minor issues: > > > I had some difficulty unraveling the relationship among the text in section > > 3.3.2, 3.3.3, 4 and RFC 7315. Section 3.3.2 specifies the > > inclusion of the NPLI option in the P-Access-Network-Info header field. > > Section 4 does not include text about the NPLI option in the > > updates to RFC 7315, and I can't find any reference to the NPLI option in > > RFC 7315. Is the intention that the text in section 3.3.2 > > constitutes new Internet Standard behavior, not reflected in the update to > > RFC 7315, am I missing something or am I completely confused? > > Sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 describe the 3GPP use-cases which justify the > changes to RFC 7315. Section 4 defines those changes. > > Section 4 then defines the changes to RFC 7315, in order to support those > use-cases. > > RFC 7315 (Annex A) does talk about the possibility for network provided > location information, and the ABNF supports it, but the details of the > network provided location information (and the other types of location > information) are defined in the 3GPP specification. > > > Section 3.3.3 specifies the inclusion of the IOI option in the > > P-Charging-Vector header field. In this case, I am not sure if this > > specification represents a change to existing text in RFC 7315 or new > > behavior. > > Section 3.3.3 (and 3.3.2) does not update RFC 7315. Section 3.3.3 only > provides the use-case/justification for the update. The update to RFC 7315 is > specified in section 4. > > > I would be happy to hear that I am completely confused; otherwise, I > > suggest some text be added to clarify that sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 also > > specify some behaviors in addition to explaining the text in section 4. > > Does my clarification above clarify?
Yes. I had missed that 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 come from 3GPP. The doc makes perfect sense to me now. Thanks for the clarification and I think the doc is ready for publication considering our agreement on the editorial nits. - Ralph > > > Nits/editorial comments: > > > In section 3.2, it would reduce potential confusion to consistently name > > the header field referenced in each bullet; e.g.: > > > > OLD: > > > > o P-Called-Party-ID: Delete statement that the header field can > > appear in SIP responses. Add statement that the P-Called-Party-ID > > header field can appear in the SIP REFER method. > > > > NEW: > > > > o P-Called-Party-ID: Delete statement that the P-Called-Party-ID > > header field can appear in SIP responses. Add statement that > > the P-Called-Party-ID header field can appear in the SIP REFER method. > > I’ll fix as suggested. > > >Section 3.3.1: > > > >OLD: > > > >This following sections describe, for individual P- header fields, > > the 3GPP use-cases that are base for the updates. > > > >NEW: > > > > The following sections describe, for individual P- header fields, > > the 3GPP use-cases that are the basis for the updates. > > I’ll fix as suggested. > > > Section 3.3.2: uniformly capitalize "Network Provided Location Information". > > I’ll fix as suggested. > > > Section 3.3.2: 3GPP TS 23.228 needs a citation of the referenced document. > > I’ll add the reference. > > > Thanks! > > Regards, > > Christer >
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
