Thanks for your review. Please see inline
From: Dan Romascanu <droma...@gmail.com>
Date: Friday, 25 November 2016 at 5:46 PM
To: "email@example.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-siprec-callflows-07
Resent-From: <alias-boun...@ietf.org>, <droma...@gmail.com>
Resent-To: <rmoh...@cisco.com>, <par...@parthasarathi.co.in>,
<pkyzi...@alum.mit.edu>, <andrew.hut...@unify.com>, <b...@brianrosen.net>,
<b...@nostrum.com>, <ali...@cooperw.in>, <aamelni...@fastmail.fm>, Andrew
Hutton <andrew.hut...@unify.com>, <draft-ietf-siprec-callflows....@ietf.org>
Resent-Date: Friday, 25 November 2016 at 5:46 PM
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your
document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
Reviewer: Dan Romascanu
Review Date: 11/25/16
IETF LC End Date: 11/27/16
IESG Telechat date: (if known) 12/2/16
This is a very useful supporting document in the SIPREC cluster.
1. The title is slightly misleading, as the document does not have as goal to
document all or the most important call flows, but rather to provide a grouping
of significant examples. 'Examples of SUP Recording Call Flows' may have been a
<Ram> I agree. The document contains only most important call flows. So I will
rename to “Examples of SIP Recording Call Flows”
2. As the document uses terminology defined in [RFC7865] and [RFC6341], listing
these two RFCs as Normative References seems necessary (can't understand the
terms without reading the two RFCs)
<Ram> agree. Will do that.
3. typo in the Securoty Considerations section: '
Security considerations mentioned in [RFC7865] and [RFC7866] has to be followed
s/has to/have to/
<Ram> Thanks will fix it.
Gen-art mailing list