Re: [Sip] WGLC on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix

["Francois Audet" <audet at nortel.com>]

That is perfectly fine with me. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:drage at alcatel-lucent.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 03:51
> To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); Dean Willis; SIP IETF
> Cc: LEBEL, CHRISTOPHE (CHRISTOPHE)
> Subject: RE: [Sip] WGLC on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix
> 
> Despite any vagaries in Dean's calling notice - this is WGLC.
> 
> Hence we will consider this as a WGLC comment.
> 
> It would be useful if other members of the working group 
> comment on this comment to ensure the editor has some WG 
> consensus to work from, as well as reviewing the draft for 
> their own WGLC comments.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Keith 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: sip-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces at ietf.org] On 
> Behalf Of 
> > Francois Audet
> > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:21 PM
> > To: Dean Willis; SIP IETF
> > Cc: LEBEL, CHRISTOPHE (CHRISTOPHE)
> > Subject: Re: [Sip] WGLC on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix
> > 
> > I do have a significant comment on this draft, because of 
> decisions in 
> > the final version if draft-ietf-sip-sips that fix some of the bugs 
> > hightlihted in this draft (and remove a use case for double record 
> > route).
> > 
> > I believe those changes fix BUG 734 and BUG 735 as listed by Robert.
> > 
> > Since draft-ietf-sip-sips does NOT use double record 
> routing anymore 
> > (in fact, it prohibits mapping from sip to sips), 
> references to this 
> > effect need to be removed from the document. Specifically:
> > 
> > - In section 1:
> > 	- In first paragraph, delete ", sip to sips".
> >       - Please delete the fourth sub-bullet.
> > 
> > - Section 3.2: I believe the following sentence in the 4th paragraph
> >   shall be deleted: 
> >   "Then, this section speaks about record-route requirements
> >    when transiting from sips to non-sips.  It's not clear that the
> >    section doesn't apply to TLS to non-TLS transitions 
> where SIPS is 
> > not
> >    involved (see [BUG734]).".
> >   Later in this section, you quote the following paragraph from RFC 
> > 3261/
> >   section 16.7 bullet 8:
> >   "If the proxy received the request over TLS, and sent it 
> out over a
> >    non-TLS connection, the proxy MUST rewrite the URI in the Record-
> >    Route header field to be a SIPS URI".
> >   As per draft-ietf-sip-sips-08/Appendix B, this whole paragraph has
> >   been deleted as a "Bug fix". So you should remove it from the text
> >   (and maybe refer to it's removal as per draft-ietf-sip-sips-08). 
> >   Furthermore, ther paragraph right after should thus be reworded as
> >   follows:
> >    Indeed, [RFC3261] suggests rewriting the Record-Route header in
> >    responses.
> >   (i.e., everything starting with ", and mandates..." until 
> the end of 
> > the
> >   paragraph is deleted.
> >   I believe this means that BUG734 and BUG735 has been adressed by
> >   draft-ietf-sip-sips-08 since mapping between sips and 
> non-sips has 
> > been deprecated.
> > 
> > - In section 4, change the last sentence to "This recommendation
> >   applies to all uses of Record-Route rewriting by proxies, 
> including
> >   transport protocol switching and multi-homed proxies."
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I would like these changes do be done before WGLC.
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: sip-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:sip-bounces at ietf.org] On
> > Behalf Of
> > > Dean Willis
> > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 08:32
> > > To: SIP IETF
> > > Subject: [Sip] WGLC on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I believe we're ready to do working group last call on the
> > > Record- Route guidelines draft. Please get comments back to
> > the list
> > > before July 29.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > See:
> > > 
> > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sip-record-rout
> > e-fix-03.txt
> > > 
> > > 
> > > --
> > > Dean
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> > > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use 
> > > sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use 
> > > sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
> > > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> > This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use 
> > sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip Use 
> > sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip
> > 
> 
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use sip-implementors at cs.columbia.edu for questions on current sip
Use sipping at ietf.org for new developments on the application of sip