I'd like to ask that a sentence in draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-02 be changed because it is ambiguous and easy to misinterpret. (A developer on the sipXecs project already got caught by it.) It is buried in the example of section 10.4, discussing how the Appearance Agent receives the statuses of appearances and passes them on to subscribing UAs:
The Appearance Agent notifies Alice of the same event by forwarding the NOTIFY payload provided by Bob after appropriately changing the dialog id field in the XML payload to a unique value towards each of the entities it is forwarding to (Alice in this example). The problem with the sentence is that it can easily be read to suggest that the NOTIFYs provided by the AA to each subscribing UA are different, whereas the issue really being addressed is the fact that the AA is "unioning" the dialog events provided by the UAs, and in so doing has to make sure the id attributes of the <dialog> elements are unique within the resulting overall status. I would like to propose this revision: The Appearance Agent notifies Alice (and all other appearances) of the same event by forwarding the NOTIFY payload provided by Bob. Since the Appearance Agent is combining Bob's dialog status with statuses provided by other appearances, it may have to change the dialog id attributes in the XML to prevent values from being duplicated by different appearances. Dale _______________________________________________ BLISS mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss
