Hi Roni,

>Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a Standard track RFC.
>
>Major issues:
>
>
>Minor issues:
>
>1.  In the document you mention that the keep alive can be negotiated in each 
>direction. I understand the dialog case, is this true 
>for the case of registration, if yes how is it done from the registrar. If not 
>true maybe add some text in 4.2.2.

Good point. It is NOT true for the case of registration, when sending of 
keep-alives can only be negotiated from the registering party to the registrar.

I suggest adding the following text to the end of section 4.2.2:

"NOTE: Sending of keep-alives associated with a registration can only be 
negotiated in the direction from the registering SIP entity towards the 
registrar."

-----

>Nits/editorial comments:
>
>1.  In section 4.1 in the first note “If a SIP entity has indicated 
>willingness to receive keep-alives from an adjacent SIP entity, 
>sending of keep-alives towards the same SIP entity needs to be separately 
>negotiated”. 
>
>Who is the same SIP entity mentioned in the end of the sentence. I assume you 
>meant “towards the adjacent SIP entity”.

(I assume you mean "Why" instead of "Who")

You are correct. I propose to change to:

"towards that adjacent SIP entity", to make sure that the text is referring to 
the entity that indicated willingness to send keep-alives, and not some other 
adjacent SIP entity.

----

>2.  In the first paragraph of 4.3 and 4.4 you use “must” should it be “MUST”

As far as I know it shall be "must" when referring to something defined in 
another specifiction.

----

>3.  In 4.3 in the third paragraph “it MUST start to send keep-alives” change 
>to “it MUST start sending keep-alives”

I'll change as suggested.

----

>4.  In figure 2 in the 200 OK response to Alice the VIA is missing.

Correct.

I'll change "Alice: UAC;keep=30" to "Via: Alice;keep=30".

----

>5.  In section 7.4 third paragraph “ When Alice receives the response, she 
>determines from her Via header 
>field that P1 is willing to receive keep-alives associated with the dialog.” 
>Should be Bob and not P1.

Correct. 

I'll change as suggested.

----

Thanks for your comments!

Regards,

Christer
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to