Hi,
I just had a quick review of the SIP-SAML activities. I found mostly
nits, which ware below, the draft generally seems mature to me.
- 1 Introduction (page 3)
maybe it is worth mentioning in the introduction already that this ID
only
considers "call by reference" for the assertions and does not provide
means for
sending the assertion directly.
- 3.1 SAML assertions (page 7)
"Explaining how the assertion was made, for example. " Sounds like an
example would follow,
which does not. I suggest removing "for example"
- 4 Specification scope (page 9), in the discussion paragraph:
"However, The ..." -> should be "However, the ..."
"participating entites ..." -> "participating entities ..."
- 5. Emplying SAML in SIP (page 11)
"seperatey" -> "separately"
- 6.1.2 Profile Overview (page 14)
"Although this profile is overview is cast in terms of a SIP INVITE
..." There is something wrong with this sentence
- 6.1.3.2 (page 19)
procedes -> proceeds
Ciao
Steffen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 11:14 AM
> To: IETF SIP List
> Subject: [Sip] draft-ietf-sip-saml-02
>
> (As WG chair)
>
> Well it seems there is interest in this work, but it is not
> getting the attention it deserves.
>
> Some people also seem to think it is almost there, but we
> have no way of judging that without seeing the what comments
> are being made against the document (or of course reviewing
> it ourselves).
>
> This week is a quiet week (we supposedly finished our current
> WGLC yesterday, and we are not yet ready to initiate another
> one, and the draft closured deadlines for the forthcoming
> IETF are still a little bit away).
>
> We therefore task the working group to take the next 7
> calendar days (ending Monday 18th June) to open up:
>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sip-saml-02.txt
>
> And for everyone to post at least one comment on the document
> to the SIP list. Posts can cover any of:
>
> - completeness - is there something missing?
> - applicability - does it identify and solve a problem?
> - readability - I didn't understand what it was trying to tell me?
> - correctness of technical solution - the solution is flawed?
> - nits
>
> We would also welcome suggestions as to whether review is
> needed by other groups than the SIP WG.
>
> And of course if you read it and find it absolutely perfect,
> send the chairs a mail at least to tell us.
>
> Regards
>
> Keith
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
> This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol Use
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
> Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
>
_______________________________________________
Sip mailing list https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip
This list is for NEW development of the core SIP Protocol
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for questions on current sip
Use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for new developments on the application of sip
