Do you believe that the call/session flows are normative or informative?
RFC 3665 call/session flows are very good illustrative examples, but do not really depict real deployments (measured in number of calls). And further, RFC 3666 does not interoperate with the PSTN, thereby not a good example. Cheers, Martin -----Original Message----- From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 7:19 PM To: Brian Stucker Cc: sip; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Sip] RAI-ART Review Comments for draft-ietf-sip-hitchhikers-guide Brian Stucker wrote: <snip/> Sorry to hijack this thread, but I'd like to second a comment that Mary Barnes made during the WGLC: http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip/current/msg20981.html *** It seems that all the call flow BCPs are missing and I do think those are really important and should be included in this document. The only BCP (type (B) document) listed in this document is 3PCC. The basic call flow document (RFC 3665) should be listed in section 3 (Core SIP). The PSTN call flows (RFC 3666, BCP 76) should be in PSTN Interworking section 4. The SIPPING NAT scenarios document should be in the NAT section 6. These docs are all icing on the cake IMHO and help to guide implementers in using all the other docs. *** I agree that the call flow documents are very useful and that a reference to them would be a good thing. Peter _______________________________________________ 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
