Re: [Simple] WGLC: draft-ietf-simple-xcap-diff-08

[Jari Urpalainen <jari.urpalainen at nokia.com>]

ext Mary Barnes wrote:
> I have reviewed the document and do care to see it published, but I'm
> not an XML expert, so can't comment on the technical correctness of the
> solution. I'm assuming folks with that expertise have reviewed the
> document?  
>
>   
mostly the "correctness" is based on xml-patch-ops, this makes an 
"upper" layer on top of that, i.e. the xml stuff  is much simpler, 
though there are some extension points, which are made as liberal as the 
w3c schema tool reasonably allows.
> Also, the security section doesn't specifically recommend anything, just
> that " must provide sufficient security capabilities", without stating
> what might be needed or used.  So, more detail might be needed (based on
> my experiences with the security directorate/ADS) - at least provide
> minimal recommendations. Perhaps, adding a note that in the case where
> SIP event packages are used, the security as described in RFC 3265
> applies, which points back to SIP security mechanisms, might be
> sufficient.
I can add a reference to sip notification framework, since it is the 
most likely use-case for this.

>   
>
> Other than that, I think the document should be ready to progress.
>
> Mary. 
>
>   
Thanks Mary,
--Jari
_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
Simple at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple