At 05:58 PM 7/15/2007, Janet P Gunn wrote:
"James M. Polk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/15/2007 06:21:06 PM:
> At 11:35 PM 7/13/2007, Janet P Gunn wrote:
>
> >Mainly editorial comments.
> >
> >It is a little confusing that section 2.1 refers to
> >"dsn-usarmy
> >dsn-usnavy
> >dsn-usairforce
> >dsn-usmarines"
> >
> >but those are not among the new namespaces being created in this
> >document. It would be clearer if you used the actual proposed
> >namespaces
> >(e.g.,dsn-000000 dsn-000010 dsn-000020 dsn-000030) in
> >the discussion of section 2.1.
>
...
>
> what would you change the description to?
>
> DSN is a domain. Divide it up into several subsets of domains and one
> c/would logically come up with the term sub-domain -- mean part of
> the larger, which each is in this case.
Probably, I would just add a sentence saying something like
"These examples illustrate the principle of the domain and subdomain
within a namespace but are not the actual namespaces being registered."
something like this is easy to add, so I will.
Janet
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
