That is perfectly fine with me.
> -----Original Message----- > From: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 03:51 > To: Audet, Francois (SC100:3055); Dean Willis; SIP IETF > Cc: LEBEL, CHRISTOPHE (CHRISTOPHE) > Subject: RE: [Sip] WGLC on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix > > Despite any vagaries in Dean's calling notice - this is WGLC. > > Hence we will consider this as a WGLC comment. > > It would be useful if other members of the working group > comment on this comment to ensure the editor has some WG > consensus to work from, as well as reviewing the draft for > their own WGLC comments. > > Regards > > Keith > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of > > Francois Audet > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 11:21 PM > > To: Dean Willis; SIP IETF > > Cc: LEBEL, CHRISTOPHE (CHRISTOPHE) > > Subject: Re: [Sip] WGLC on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix > > > > I do have a significant comment on this draft, because of > decisions in > > the final version if draft-ietf-sip-sips that fix some of the bugs > > hightlihted in this draft (and remove a use case for double record > > route). > > > > I believe those changes fix BUG 734 and BUG 735 as listed by Robert. > > > > Since draft-ietf-sip-sips does NOT use double record > routing anymore > > (in fact, it prohibits mapping from sip to sips), > references to this > > effect need to be removed from the document. Specifically: > > > > - In section 1: > > - In first paragraph, delete ", sip to sips". > > - Please delete the fourth sub-bullet. > > > > - Section 3.2: I believe the following sentence in the 4th paragraph > > shall be deleted: > > "Then, this section speaks about record-route requirements > > when transiting from sips to non-sips. It's not clear that the > > section doesn't apply to TLS to non-TLS transitions > where SIPS is > > not > > involved (see [BUG734]).". > > Later in this section, you quote the following paragraph from RFC > > 3261/ > > section 16.7 bullet 8: > > "If the proxy received the request over TLS, and sent it > out over a > > non-TLS connection, the proxy MUST rewrite the URI in the Record- > > Route header field to be a SIPS URI". > > As per draft-ietf-sip-sips-08/Appendix B, this whole paragraph has > > been deleted as a "Bug fix". So you should remove it from the text > > (and maybe refer to it's removal as per draft-ietf-sip-sips-08). > > Furthermore, ther paragraph right after should thus be reworded as > > follows: > > Indeed, [RFC3261] suggests rewriting the Record-Route header in > > responses. > > (i.e., everything starting with ", and mandates..." until > the end of > > the > > paragraph is deleted. > > I believe this means that BUG734 and BUG735 has been adressed by > > draft-ietf-sip-sips-08 since mapping between sips and > non-sips has > > been deprecated. > > > > - In section 4, change the last sentence to "This recommendation > > applies to all uses of Record-Route rewriting by proxies, > including > > transport protocol switching and multi-homed proxies." > > > > > > > > I would like these changes do be done before WGLC. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of > > > Dean Willis > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 08:32 > > > To: SIP IETF > > > Subject: [Sip] WGLC on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix > > > > > > > > > I believe we're ready to do working group last call on the > > > Record- Route guidelines draft. Please get comments back to > > the list > > > before July 29. > > > > > > > > > See: > > > > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sip-record-rout > > e-fix-03.txt > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Dean > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Sip mailing list https://www.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://www.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://www.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
