[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Ecrit] Emergency Address Directory section (<draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-requirements-01.txt>)
hi all,
please find my comments below (#).
i think that this section should be merged with the previous section
since most requirements directly relate to the mapping protocol.
7. Emergency Address Directory
D1. PSAP Identification: The mapping information MUST be available
without having to enroll with a service provider.
# what mapping information?
# how does this relate to psap identification?
# this seems to be an operational requirement, if i understood it
correctly. isn't this already covered by R1 partially? should this, if
needed at all, be moved to section 3?
Motivation: The mapping server may well be operated by a service
provider, but access to the server offering the mapping MUST NOT
require use of a specific ISP or VSP.
# motivation should not juse capitalized MUST, MAY, SHOULD, etc.
D5. Call setup latency: The directory lookup SHOULD minimize any
added delay to the call setup.
# i suggest not to talk about call setup latency. we are working on a
mapping protocol. how can we control things that are outside the scope
of our work?
# i understand if we have a requirement like:
# Efficiency: The mapping protocol SHOULD have a minimum number of
roundtrips.
Motivation: Since outbound proxies will likely be asked to
resolve the same geographic coordinates repeatedly, a suitable
time-limited caching mechanism should be supported.
# the motivation does not match the requirement. if we think that there
is a requirement for caching then we should phrase is at such.
D7. Referral: The querier MUST be able to contact any server and be
referred to another server that is more qualified to answer the
query.
Motivation: This requirement alleviates the potential for
misconfigurations to cause calls to fail, particularly for caller-
based queries.
# this requirement should be related to I3. place them next to each
other.
D9. Baseline query protocol: A mandatory-to-implement protocol MUST
be specified.
Motivation: An over-abundance of similarly-capable choices
appears undesirable for interoperability.
ciao
hannes
_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
Ecrit at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit