Subject: [Sipping] WGLC Review: draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios-08

From: "Mary Barnes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 3 May 2008 11:17:20 -0500

Sorry folks - obviously I had the wrong title in the original
announcement

-----Original Message-----
From: Barnes, Mary (RICH2:AR00) 
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 5:45 PM
To: [email-masked]'
Cc: 'Chris Boulton'; [email-masked]';
[email-masked]'; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
Subject: RE: WG Review: draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios-07

Hi folks,

This is to announce a Working Group Last Call on the following document
to be published a Best Current Practice (BCP):
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios-08.
txt

The review period will end on 23 May 2008 (3 weeks time). 

Note that I have cross-posted to the BEHAVE and MMUSIC WGs, but ask that
you please send your comments only to the SIPPING WG and author(s). 

The following reviewers have already volunteered:  Vijay Gurbani,
Spencer Dawkins, Francois Audet, and Dan Wing  (thanks guys!)

However, we do encourage others to review and make any final comments on
the document at this time.  

Thanks,
Mary
SIPPING WG co-chair

As a reminder, the SIPPING WG review guidelines are available at:
https://softarmor.com/sipping/process/wg-review/sipping-review-guideline
s.html

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: Rémi Denis-Courmont <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 10:39:35 +0300

> the document at this time.

I am overall happy with the document.

Section 5.2 refers to ANAT for v6 media transition. I thought it was being 
deprecated by ICE, so I am a bit confused.

Otherwise, minor typo in section 7.2. Not sure if it comes from bibxml or 
something:
              Camarillo, G., "IPv6 Transcition in the Session Initiation

Best regards,                                      ^^^

-- 
Rémi Denis-Courmont

---

From: "Jerry Yin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 14:29:29 -0400

Here are some comments:

Editorial errors:
1. There are two Figure 6 in page 12 and 14 respectively, and reference
errors to the figures accordingly.
2. Page 13: 'connectionID", do you mean 'reg-id'?
3. Missing 'outbound' tag in the Supported header in all examples according
to the Outbound draft.
4. It seems the GRUU parameter in the INVITE example on page 19 does not
match the latest GRUU draft (version 14). Specifically, I don't see the
'grid=' tag in the latest GRUU draft. One suggestion is to add the 200 OK
response example with GRUU tags in section 4.1.2 (page 17), so that the
reader know how the GRUU tag is copied to the INVITE requests.

Technical problem:
In section 4.1.4, I think the INVITE from Proxy to the Client behind the NAT
is missing the Record-Route header. Without the RR header, the re-Invite or
any other request from the client (Callee behind the NAT) will go directly
to the caller's 'Contact' header, not the Proxy.

Regards,
Jerry

> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On
> Behalf Of Mary Barnes
> Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 12:17 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: [Sipping] WGLC Review: draft-ietf-sipping-nat-scenarios-08
>
>

---

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 06 May 2008 13:06:34 +0300

Hi,

> deprecated by ICE, so I am a bit confused.

yes, we have to remove the ANAT part. We will edit the draft so that it 
only refers  to ICE in that part.

Thanks,

Gonzalo