Subject: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-websocket-06

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2012 12:33:27 +0000

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for 
this draft (for background on appsdir, please see 
http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate ).

Please resolve these comments along with any other comments you  may 
receive.  Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD 
before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-websocket-06
Title: The WebSocket Protocol as a Transport for the Session Initiation 
Protocol (SIP)
Reviewer: Alexey Melnikov
Review Date: 26 November 2012
Summary: The document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard, 
with nits.

Major Issues: none
Minor Issues/Nits:

In 5.1: if Content-Length is specified, it has to match the message size 
used to send the corresponding SIP request/response. I think it would 
help to specify that if they don't match than that is an error condition.

In 5.2.2: should "wss" also be registered?

In 5.2.3: this reminds me of the HTTP Forwarded header field draft 
(draft-ietf-appsawg-http-forwarded-10). It might be worth checking if 
any privacy considerations from it are applicable to this document.

Also, if a Received header field is added, what should be the transport 
identifier be?

In 5.2.4: the MAY seems wrong, this is already an extension. The whole 
section doesn't seem to be needed.

RFC 2617 is a normative reference, IMHO, as it is used in a statement 
using an RFC 2119 keyword.