Subject: [Iptel] Comments on draft-yu-tel-url-08

From: Flemming Andreasen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 21:16:20 -0500

I've taken a closer look at the draft-yu-tel-url-08.txt and have some
questions and comments on it.

Non-Editorial Comments:
- The document is fairly focused on how you can use the tel-URL
extensions defined here in SIP. At least in the Abstract and Section 1,
I'd suggest loosening this coupling a bit as the subject of the document
is the tel-URL extensions rather than how to use them with SIP. Also, it
might be worthwhile making it clear, that these extensions can be used
with any protocol that happens to make use of the tel-URL, e.g. H.323 as
well. In line with this, I'd suggest removing Section 8.

- Lack of requirements: While reading through the document, I felt that
the document was a bit "loose" in some places and relied on the reader
just knowing how these things work. It then occurred to me, that there
is not a single RFC 2119 requirements word to be found in the document
which doesn't seem quite right. I'd suggest taking another pass and
adding some RFC 2119 requirement words throughout (or at least in
Section 5 where firmer language and additional detail is generally
needed).

- JIP Parameter: It is listed in the Abbreviations section but not
referenced in the doc. That's of course a minor issue but there is a
bigger issue of whether we should have support for the JIP parameter as
I don't believe you have full support for LNP without it (billing
problem when originator has been ported if I understand correctly).

- Section 5, second last paragraph states that:
   "The "CIC" can be expanded to include VoIP carriers and other types
   of carriers in the same country or under the same country code so
   that all carriers can be identified in the IP domain for routing
   purpose."
I don't quite understand what this means. Is this something the document
defines and if so how ? Either way, this should be clarified.

- Section 6.1, last paragraph:    I don't follow the recommendation. The
example just above the text that talks about "the example described
above" does not show the "rn" parameter, and if the "rn" parameter is
not included in the previous example, I'm not sure how it would work.
Please elaborate.

- Section 9: The security considerations should provide guidelines for
how to remedy the threats identified.

General editorial comments:
- There are numerous format/conversion problems throughout the document
(doesn't look like pure ASCII).
- Use of commas and periods inside or outside double-quotes. This is
clearly a style issue with no universally agreed upon rules, but clarity
argues for placing them outside the quotes when you are referencing a
literal value rather than quoting a piece of text, i.e. "rn," should
rather be "rn", IMO.
- Should probably also reference Security Considerations section at the
end of Section 1.
- The document treats POTS and free-phone numbers as two different
things; are they ? See for example, Section 1, 2nd paragraph.
- The document talks about the extensions as being "proposed". May want
to reword to "defined" or something like that.

Detailed editorial comments:

p. 1
OLD: ABTRACT
NEW: ABSTRACT

Section 1, 3rd paragraph
OLD: associate
NEW: associated

Abbreviations:
OLD: Telephony Routing Information Protocol
NEW: Telephony Routing over IP

OLD: Uniform Resource Locators
NEW: Uniform Resource Locator

Section 4, 2nd and 3rd paragraph (i.e. twice)

OLD: POT number
NEW: POTS number

Section 5, ABNF
OLD: ";rn"
NEW: "rn"

Section 5, 2nd paragraph after ABNF:
OLD: identify a country code
NEW: identify an E.164 country code

Section 5, 4th paragraph after ABNF:
The sentence:
   "It is also possible that the SIP protocol can be used for the NP
query.
   In that case, the response (e.g., 302 Moved) to the SIP message may
   carry the NP related information in the "tel" or "sip" URL format
   with the parameters proposed in this document."
doesn't belong in this document IMO (unless you want to define that
mechanism here as well).

Section 5, 5th paragraph after ABNF:
   "A new address family in the Telephony Routing Information Protocol
(TRIP)[7] has
   been defined for cic."
Where is this defined - is there a reference ?

Regards

       Flemming

_______________________________________________
Iptel mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel