Howdy,
I have the following comments, mostly editorial nits, on the latest draft. I
think these do not overlap with John Elwell's.
General comment: I think it's in great shape, and very thorough.
1) I do not see any discussion of RFC 3680 SIP Registration Event Package. I
assume that each registered flow's contact is treated as a unique contact in
all regards to RFC 3680, right? And the reg-id and instance would be saved in
the "unknown-param" XML element of the contact element, making those unique
(vs. being unique contact URI's). I think maybe that should be clarified
somewhere, as rfc3680 is not uncommon.
2) If a Register is 3xx redirected, does the new retargeted Register use the
same reg-id, even though it's a different "flow"? (I assume so) I ask because
some people use 3xx for Registers to load-balance or perform anycasting. It
may be good to add this to end of section 4.2.1.
3) Page 5:
Reg-id: "When a UA registers multiple times, each concurrent registration gets
a unique reg-id value." Replace with: "When a UA registers multiple times,
each for a different flow, each concurrent registration gets a unique reg-id
value."
4) Page 12, Section 3.5.2:
The proxy or registrar acts as a Session
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN) [I-D.ietf-behave-rfc3489bis]
server on the SIP signaling port.
Insert "limited" before "Session". (ie, it is not a full STUN server)
5) Page 12, Section 3.5.2:
Note: The STUN mechanism is very robust and allows the detection
of a changed IP address.
Add "and port" at the end.
6) Page 12, Section 4.1:
"It also provides an easy way to guarantee uniqueness within the AOR." I'm a
bit confused by that, because I don't believe we're saying one UA instance only
ever represents one AoR. (ie, multiple AoR's registered on the same UA will
have the same registered contact instance) Recommend removing or rewording.
7) Page 14, Section 4.2.1:
For each outbound proxy URI in the set, the UAC SHOULD send a
REGISTER request using this URI as the default outbound proxy. (The
UA could limit the number of flows formed to conserve battery power,
for example).
The logic flow is awkward there. Change second sentence to start with
"Alternatively, the UAC could...".
8) Page 15, Section 4.2.1:
If the registering UA receives a 439 (First Hop Lacks Outbound
Support) response to a REGISTER request, it MAY re-attempt
registration without an outbound proxy (subject to local policy at
the client).
I think what you mean at the end is instead "without using the outbound
mechanism"?
9) Page 16, Section 4.3:
... For TLS protocols, there MUST also
be a match between the host production in the next hop and one of the
URIs contained in the subjectAltName in the peer certificate.
s/production in/resolved for/
10) Page 18, Section 4.4.1:
A User Agent that forms flows, checks if the configured URI to which
the UA is connecting resolves to a stream-based transport (ex: TCP
and TLS over TCP).
That's confusing, because double-CRLF is used for connection-oriented
transports period, not only stream-based ones (ie, also used for SCTP). And no
statement is made about why it checks for stream-based, so I recommend removing
it or clarifying.
-hadriel
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www.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
