inline.
DRAGE, Keith (Keith) wrote:
Two comments on the sigcomp part of this document.
While Sigcomp is mentioned in passing, RFC 3320 is referenced and this
has been updated by RFC 4896. The ROHC people also consider RFC 4077 an
integral part of the Sigcomp package and RFC 4896 assumes this.
I added a reference to 4896 along with 3320 as the reference for
sigcomp. However our objective is not to do the hitchhikers guide to
sigcomp; so as long as rfc4896 references 4077 people can follow that chain.
Additionally draft-ietf-rohc-sigcomp-sip is currently with IESG and
this, among other things, defines a SIP Via header parameter and this
should probably be referenced as a SIP extension.
What???
Can this be???
Keith - did you let another working group define a SIP extension?
;)
Reference added.
-Jonathan R.
--
Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 600 Lanidex Plaza
Cisco Fellow Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711
Cisco Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED] FAX: (973) 952-5050
http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (973) 952-5000
http://www.cisco.com
_______________________________________________
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
