I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
draft-ietf-sipping-toip-08.txt
For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<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.
Summary: This draft is well written and is almost ready for publication,
but I have a couple of comments.
* The term modality is used in the document but it has not been defined.
The meaning I perceive from this document does not match with the normal
English usage of "modality". I think the document uses this word to
describe the way in which the TOIP device interacts with human. This
needs to be clearly stated.
* I do not have strong feelings regarding this, but I feel that using
RFC2119 terminology in this document is inappropriate given that the
document is aiming to be an Informational RFC.
* Section 5.2.1: I think requirement R5 is redundant given requirement
R6. Is there any use case that is covered by R5 and not by R6?
* Section 5.2.2: Why is there a requirement for maximum delay per
character? A character by itself is not useful. I would think setting
the delay per word makes more sense, since this is the smallest
comprehensible text unit.
* Section 5.2.4: I am not clear what this requirement means. Can we add
more specific text to this one.
"R31: Users MUST be presented with appropriate session progress
information at all times."
* Section 5.2.4: I think this requirement has enormous privacy
implications. This needs to be explicitly stated.
"R35: It SHOULD be possible to save the text portion of a conversation."
Cheers
Suresh
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
