Hi Derek, Thank you for responding and addressing the comments in my review. As stated these were 'Nits' level comments, so I have no problems with your resolutions. This is a good document and can go ahead, from my perspective.
Regards, Dan On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 7:43 PM Derek Engi (deengi) <dee...@cisco.com> wrote: > Hi Dan, thanks so much for taking the time to review, here are our > comments: > > > > >> I would consider mentioning explicitly 'SIP trunking' in the > Description of the 'sip-trunking-capability' link relation in the registry. > > > > We went back and forth with how best to incorporate an explicit call out > to SIP trunking in the IANA description. We felt that “automated peering > and communication channel negotiation” gave a broader context rather than > using trunking explicitly, where we then may have to explain nuance of what > trunking is and where it occurs. Our preference would be to leave the > definition as is since we feel it is intentionally broad. > > > > >> Should not [I-D.ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer] be a Normative Reference? > > > > We intentionally left this as informative because the link type > registration itself is not dependent on the ASAP draft. Since this > registration does not have any implementation actions and is purely > informational, we believe the ASAP draft that defines the capability set > document will make a normative reference to this registration document. > > > > Thanks again for all the feedback and comments. > > Derek > > > > -- > > Derek Engi > > dee...@cisco.com > > > > > > *From: *Dan Romascanu via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> > *Date: *Saturday, March 18, 2023 at 4:36 AM > *To: *gen-art@ietf.org <gen-art@ietf.org> > *Cc: *a...@ietf.org <a...@ietf.org>, > draft-ietf-asap-siptrunkingcapability-link....@ietf.org < > draft-ietf-asap-siptrunkingcapability-link....@ietf.org>, > last-c...@ietf.org <last-c...@ietf.org>, droma...@gmail.com < > droma...@gmail.com> > *Subject: *Genart last call review of > draft-ietf-asap-siptrunkingcapability-link-03 > > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review result: Ready with Nits > > 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 treat these comments just > like any other last call comments. > > For more information, please see the FAQ at > > <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>. > > Document: draft-ietf-asap-siptrunkingcapability-link-03 > Reviewer: Dan Romascanu > Review Date: 2023-03-18 > IETF LC End Date: 2023-03-22 > IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat > > Summary: > > This is a short and clear document describing the usage of the > 'sip-trunking-capability' link relation type by an enterprise SIP network > to > retrieve a SIP trunking capability set document containing the > capabilities and > configuration requirements of an ITSP. > > Major issues: > > Minor issues: > > Nits/editorial comments: > > 1. The description of the 'sip-trunking-capability' link relation by IANA > does > not seem to be fully consistent with the scope of the document as defined > in > Section 1. > > In Section 1: > > The capability set document > [I-D.ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer] encapsulates a set of characteristics > of an ITSP, which when retrieved by enterprise telephony network > devices allows for automated establishment of SIP [RFC3261] trunking > between the two telephony networks. > > Description: Refers to a capability set document that defines > parameters or configuration requirements for automated peering and > communication channel negotiation of the Session Initiation > Protocol (SIP). > > I would consider mentioning explicitly 'SIP trunking' in the Description > of the > 'sip-trunking-capability' link relation in the registry. > > 2. Should not [I-D.ietf-asap-sip-auto-peer] be a Normative Reference? > > >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
