Hi Dan,

Thanks for your review. Please see inline

From: Dan Romascanu <droma...@gmail.com>
Date: Friday, 25 November 2016 at 5:46 PM
To: "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.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

Summary: Ready.

This is a very useful supporting document in the SIPREC cluster.

Major issues:


Minor issues:


Nits/editorial comments:

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 
better title.

<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

Reply via email to