I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviewer
for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html). Please resolve
these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix-06.txt
Reviewer: Sean Turner
Review Date: 2009-07-02
IETF LC End Date: 2009-07-07
IESG Telechat date: N/A
Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a BCP RFC.
Nits:
Sec 3.2: r/knowledge(such/knowledge (such
Sec 3.2: r/transport"./transport."
Sec 3.2: r/not clear to decide when/not clear how to decide when (?)
Sec 5: Is something wrong with the 1st sentence? It seems to say there
are serious issues and that's why it is recommended as a solution: The
serious drawbacks of the rewriting technique probably explain why the
double Record-Routing solution has consequently been recommended in SIP
extensions like [RFC3486] or [RFC3608].
Sec 5: r/consists in inserting/consists of inserting
Sec 6.1: r/(biloxi.example.com)? if/(biloxi.example.com)? If
Cheers,
spt
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
