Subject: [Ecrit] Phonebcp-02 comments (mostly semantics)

From: "Stark, Barbara" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2007 11:01:25 -0400

Following are my mostly semantic comments on phonebcp-02. I also have a
Word document that includes all my purely editorial comments. Unless
others want to see those, I'll just send that directly to the editors.
Barbara
--------------------------------
   ED-18 Endpoints SHOULD do location configuration themselves.

This sentence is awkward, both in wording, and in since it doesn't seem
to agree with requirements in 6.5. 6.5 says endpoints MUST support all
those techniques. Should 6.5 says "Endpoints that support methods for
location configuration MUST...", and should this say "Endpoints SHOULD
support location configuration as described in Section 6.5."? Or should
both requirements be a must?
---------------------------------
   ED-32/AN-19 The LIS SHOULD provide a location reference which permits
   a subscription with appropriate filtering.

Does this mean the LIS should always provide? Or should be able to
provide, either when requested, or per LIS policy?
----------------------------------
   ED-61/SP-38 During the course of an emergency call, devices and
   proxies MUST support REFER transactions and the Referred-by: header
   [RFC3515] to:
   2.  Be REFERed to a secondary PSAP.  Some responder's dispatchers are
       not located in the primary PSAP.  The call may have to be
       transferred to another PSAP.  Most often this will be an attended
       transfer, or a bridged transfer.(For devices that are Mobile).

Does the parenthetic (about devices that are mobile) apply to the entire
requirement, or does it imply that only mobile devices will do bridged
transfer? The intent of the parenthetic is unclear.

_______________________________________________
Ecrit mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit