From nobody Mon Jan 23 08:42:15 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DE761295B0 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:42:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.401 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1e5iDoFYyTZ8 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 534DE1295AF for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:42:12 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 40CBCB8261C; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:42:12 -0800 (PST) To: alan.b.johnston@gmail.com, msoroush@gmail.com, vvenkatar@gmail.com, ben@nostrum.com, alissa@cooperw.in, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, shida@ntt-at.com X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20170123164212.40CBCB8261C@rfc-editor.org> Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:42:12 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: Cc: bliss@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: [BLISS] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7463 (4915) X-BeenThere: bliss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services \(BLISS\) BoF" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 16:42:14 -0000 The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7463, "Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR)". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7463&eid=4915 -------------------------------------- Type: Editorial Reported by: Brett Tate Section: GLOBAL Original Text ------------- To: ;tag=428765950880801 Corrected Text -------------- To: Notes ----- PUBLISH must not contain To tag unless sending within dialog. The To tag (428765950880801) appears to be extraneous within the following SIP messages since there is no explanation about which dialog is being shared: section 11.7 F32, section 11.9 F32, section 11.10 F22, and section 11.14 F48. The To/From URI values within section 11.7 F32 also should be swapped since it does not appear to be intentional and is different than the other examples indicating To tag value 428765950880801. Section 11.4 F2 also has To tag issues since a To tag must be present to comply with RFC 3261. Section 11.6 F28 also should not be missing a To tag. Instructions: ------------- This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. -------------------------------------- RFC7463 (draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-15) -------------------------------------- Title : Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR) Publication Date : March 2015 Author(s) : A. Johnston, Ed., M. Soroushnejad, Ed., V. Venkataramanan Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Mon Jan 23 08:53:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD7AF1295AE; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:53:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zu2hHWO588JF; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:53:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63DAD1295AD; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 08:53:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.39] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v0NGrUVG030559 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:53:31 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.39] From: "Ben Campbell" To: SIPCORE Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:53:30 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20170123164212.40CBCB8261C@rfc-editor.org> References: <20170123164212.40CBCB8261C@rfc-editor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5319) Archived-At: Cc: aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, alissa@cooperw.in, bliss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [BLISS] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7463 (4915) X-BeenThere: bliss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services \(BLISS\) BoF" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 16:53:38 -0000 (Adding SIPCORE) What do people think of this errata report? Has anyone experienced interop problems due to the described issue? Thanks! Ben. On 23 Jan 2017, at 10:42, RFC Errata System wrote: > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7463, > "Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of > Record (AOR)". > > -------------------------------------- > You may review the report below and at: > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7463&eid=4915 > > -------------------------------------- > Type: Editorial > Reported by: Brett Tate > > Section: GLOBAL > > Original Text > ------------- > To: ;tag=428765950880801 > > Corrected Text > -------------- > To: > > Notes > ----- > PUBLISH must not contain To tag unless sending within dialog. The To > tag (428765950880801) appears to be extraneous within the following > SIP messages since there is no explanation about which dialog is being > shared: section 11.7 F32, section 11.9 F32, section 11.10 F22, and > section 11.14 F48. The To/From URI values within section 11.7 F32 > also should be swapped since it does not appear to be intentional and > is different than the other examples indicating To tag value > 428765950880801. > > Section 11.4 F2 also has To tag issues since a To tag must be present > to comply with RFC 3261. Section 11.6 F28 also should not be missing > a To tag. > > Instructions: > ------------- > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or > rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party > can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > -------------------------------------- > RFC7463 (draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-15) > -------------------------------------- > Title : Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation > Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR) > Publication Date : March 2015 > Author(s) : A. Johnston, Ed., M. Soroushnejad, Ed., V. > Venkataramanan > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > Source : Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services > Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure > Stream : IETF > Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Mon Jan 23 10:20:09 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 346E6129731 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:20:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.921 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.921 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=broadsoft-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id r67lnSOE97s3 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:20:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0a-001d8301.pphosted.com (mx0a-001d8301.pphosted.com [67.231.149.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C892712971B for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:20:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0103510.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001d8301.pphosted.com (8.16.0.20/8.16.0.20) with SMTP id v0NIETfD015001 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:20:01 -0500 Received: from mail-lf0-f72.google.com (mail-lf0-f72.google.com [209.85.215.72]) by mx0a-001d8301.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 28458xkfvq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:20:01 -0500 Received: by mail-lf0-f72.google.com with SMTP id o12so63938887lfg.7 for ; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:20:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadsoft-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:thread-index:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0wZGjeeJmfFX81fkR15n2YfHSLI4TdIdPMQEcxSTGRA=; b=oUakqZMyyKvnVxL+Pk1K4KyqAgkGeDDyOt82w0UZrRiK96zW/5LtX7LUlN6tBvgbeV s+XqF0lyOYw2+VTqQms1UUUiIxcwK6r+ZGJ0HYHEX5IqchS1/g0G6sOYP3A4hkrJK7w1 LQ5oaosZjtLLxgnXugVLVipDlHQGRb/LVjow3hjijIoeGT7rKZL5tpJ3SI/dTAo/DOXH HOq5It490IZAm2JgLFtLBTX0ytd9arttvBoe4c8WgLu4VzLp3+E2yD3DdpMzajhkyCaz le8WPY5x7p41ZK5Vd+gsQGWx3BkSE3nzzhOnXc+qfyyaeoV2s+JCzQBxtrkts6u74264 4Grg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :thread-index:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0wZGjeeJmfFX81fkR15n2YfHSLI4TdIdPMQEcxSTGRA=; b=lWVpQ2MBCL+7Lmym/fTQGBi67B/CmeK2J4o3JIFkBbvtPRMxT8LFmSmXrxuX+jCRnd 0DORFDhI2kz2cQ8moIqHFLT7akPQEOlC/DnnMZKCYxr3Zf/LfFkZAlz62CSpGLZoNA+1 n9BRltodEl1OsRtc7ZVqcIdUi/qGZF2rdTVqKfcI4Q8QnMHkubOcYpM9HVL2j+3IrrF7 V/VqiN3TNDOWlgkl/25q5KH7iUL6AhCckfLII6VoPj970iWn5TtOJT63j/wI9S1E57Ni PEVvrMu4kZeTM089/JMSb8jdHs6KwfN8ilfUbgnzatS0Rtg2pnaAf5qO7Ahl2KyGasYv uAdg== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKLB5ehNnCvPDVSaqLdZOcfJkfJKwmskxthg7VY9egZ7XShtO7W1baSRihSjXs8t9rGgMrzRrT7sFUXtWZqAJbQZUi4vwhx5fNVm+AVSsYisWBMl3+IudWNwTLbkzg9AOV4c+K9qg== X-Received: by 10.46.14.26 with SMTP id 26mr8245491ljo.59.1485195598775; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:19:58 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.46.14.26 with SMTP id 26mr8245481ljo.59.1485195598486; Mon, 23 Jan 2017 10:19:58 -0800 (PST) From: Brett Tate References: <20170123164212.40CBCB8261C@rfc-editor.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQIMcYhOT0q5/xkOiOD0pW6sTQ/YhwGffYLBoMVZ/cA= Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 13:19:56 -0500 Message-ID: <47691faf5fc0859886d2f6266bb9eea2@mail.gmail.com> To: Ben Campbell , SIPCORE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-01-23_15:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Reason: safe Archived-At: Cc: aamelnikov@fastmail.fm, alissa@cooperw.in, bliss@ietf.org Subject: Re: [BLISS] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7463 (4915) X-BeenThere: bliss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services \(BLISS\) BoF" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 18:20:04 -0000 Hi, I'm not aware of interoperability issues due to what is reported within the errata. I've only seen it indirectly cause issues within related documentation (not code). After some discussion within sip-implementors, I reported the errata as editorial to help others and myself understand the examples and basic SIP. I also reported it to help ensure corrected within rfc7463bis (if ever actually needed). Sorry about not splitting up the report into multiple errata. However, it didn't seem worth the effort to report/discuss the items separately. Thanks, Brett > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Campbell [mailto:ben@nostrum.com] > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:54 AM > To: SIPCORE > Cc: alan.b.johnston@gmail.com; msoroush@gmail.com; vvenkatar@gmail.com; > alissa@cooperw.in; aamelnikov@fastmail.fm; shida@ntt-at.com; > brett@broadsoft.com; bliss@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7463 (4915) > > (Adding SIPCORE) > > What do people think of this errata report? Has anyone experienced interop > problems due to the described issue? > > Thanks! > > Ben. > > On 23 Jan 2017, at 10:42, RFC Errata System wrote: > > > The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7463, "Shared > > Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of Record > > (AOR)". > > > > -------------------------------------- > > You may review the report below and at: > > http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7463&eid=4915 > > > > -------------------------------------- > > Type: Editorial > > Reported by: Brett Tate > > > > Section: GLOBAL > > > > Original Text > > ------------- > > To: ;tag=428765950880801 > > > > Corrected Text > > -------------- > > To: > > > > Notes > > ----- > > PUBLISH must not contain To tag unless sending within dialog. The To > > tag (428765950880801) appears to be extraneous within the following > > SIP messages since there is no explanation about which dialog is being > > shared: section 11.7 F32, section 11.9 F32, section 11.10 F22, and > > section 11.14 F48. The To/From URI values within section 11.7 F32 > > also should be swapped since it does not appear to be intentional and > > is different than the other examples indicating To tag value > > 428765950880801. > > > > Section 11.4 F2 also has To tag issues since a To tag must be present > > to comply with RFC 3261. Section 11.6 F28 also should not be missing > > a To tag. > > > > Instructions: > > ------------- > > This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please > > use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or rejected. > > When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change > > the status and edit the report, if necessary. > > > > -------------------------------------- > > RFC7463 (draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-15) > > -------------------------------------- > > Title : Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation > > Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR) > > Publication Date : March 2015 > > Author(s) : A. Johnston, Ed., M. Soroushnejad, Ed., V. > > Venkataramanan > > Category : PROPOSED STANDARD > > Source : Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services > > Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure > > Stream : IETF > > Verifying Party : IESG From nobody Tue Jan 24 14:06:37 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D8612940D; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:06:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -5.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BeXnZR7D_B2z; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:06:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 52F7112940B; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:06:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.1.39] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id v0OM6RRj014595 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:06:28 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.39] From: "Ben Campbell" To: "Brett Tate" Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 16:06:27 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <47691faf5fc0859886d2f6266bb9eea2@mail.gmail.com> References: <20170123164212.40CBCB8261C@rfc-editor.org> <47691faf5fc0859886d2f6266bb9eea2@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed X-Mailer: MailMate (1.9.6r5319) Archived-At: Cc: bliss@ietf.org, SIPCORE , alissa@cooperw.in, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm Subject: Re: [BLISS] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7463 (4915) X-BeenThere: bliss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services \(BLISS\) BoF" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 22:06:36 -0000 Thanks for the comments. I plan to mark this "hold for update", as usual for non-urgent editorial errata. Thanks! Ben. On 23 Jan 2017, at 12:19, Brett Tate wrote: > Hi, > > I'm not aware of interoperability issues due to what is reported > within > the errata. I've only seen it indirectly cause issues within related > documentation (not code). > > After some discussion within sip-implementors, I reported the errata > as > editorial to help others and myself understand the examples and basic > SIP. > I also reported it to help ensure corrected within rfc7463bis (if ever > actually needed). > > Sorry about not splitting up the report into multiple errata. > However, it > didn't seem worth the effort to report/discuss the items separately. > > Thanks, > Brett > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Ben Campbell [mailto:ben@nostrum.com] >> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 11:54 AM >> To: SIPCORE >> Cc: alan.b.johnston@gmail.com; msoroush@gmail.com; >> vvenkatar@gmail.com; >> alissa@cooperw.in; aamelnikov@fastmail.fm; shida@ntt-at.com; >> brett@broadsoft.com; bliss@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC7463 (4915) >> >> (Adding SIPCORE) >> >> What do people think of this errata report? Has anyone experienced > interop >> problems due to the described issue? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Ben. >> >> On 23 Jan 2017, at 10:42, RFC Errata System wrote: >> >>> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC7463, "Shared >>> Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of Record >>> (AOR)". >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> You may review the report below and at: >>> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7463&eid=4915 >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Type: Editorial >>> Reported by: Brett Tate >>> >>> Section: GLOBAL >>> >>> Original Text >>> ------------- >>> To: ;tag=428765950880801 >>> >>> Corrected Text >>> -------------- >>> To: >>> >>> Notes >>> ----- >>> PUBLISH must not contain To tag unless sending within dialog. The >>> To >>> tag (428765950880801) appears to be extraneous within the following >>> SIP messages since there is no explanation about which dialog is >>> being >>> shared: section 11.7 F32, section 11.9 F32, section 11.10 F22, and >>> section 11.14 F48. The To/From URI values within section 11.7 F32 >>> also should be swapped since it does not appear to be intentional >>> and >>> is different than the other examples indicating To tag value >>> 428765950880801. >>> >>> Section 11.4 F2 also has To tag issues since a To tag must be >>> present >>> to comply with RFC 3261. Section 11.6 F28 also should not be >>> missing >>> a To tag. >>> >>> Instructions: >>> ------------- >>> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >>> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >>> rejected. >>> When a decision is reached, the verifying party can log in to change >>> the status and edit the report, if necessary. >>> >>> -------------------------------------- >>> RFC7463 (draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-15) >>> -------------------------------------- >>> Title : Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation >>> Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR) >>> Publication Date : March 2015 >>> Author(s) : A. Johnston, Ed., M. Soroushnejad, Ed., V. >>> Venkataramanan >>> Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >>> Source : Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP >>> Services >>> Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure >>> Stream : IETF >>> Verifying Party : IESG > > _______________________________________________ > BLISS mailing list > BLISS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss From nobody Tue Jan 24 14:07:35 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: bliss@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E699129410; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:07:28 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -7.401 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.401 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-3.199, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OQ740K-6BetV; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:07:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 696D112940F; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:07:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 5B2B3B802ED; Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:07:27 -0800 (PST) To: brett@broadsoft.com, alan.b.johnston@gmail.com, msoroush@gmail.com, vvenkatar@gmail.com X-PHP-Originating-Script: 30:errata_mail_lib.php From: RFC Errata System Message-Id: <20170124220727.5B2B3B802ED@rfc-editor.org> Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 14:07:27 -0800 (PST) Archived-At: Cc: ben@nostrum.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, iesg@ietf.org, bliss@ietf.org Subject: [BLISS] [Errata Held for Document Update] RFC7463 (4915) X-BeenThere: bliss@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services \(BLISS\) BoF" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2017 22:07:28 -0000 The following errata report has been held for document update for RFC7463, "Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR)". -------------------------------------- You may review the report below and at: http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=7463&eid=4915 -------------------------------------- Status: Held for Document Update Type: Editorial Reported by: Brett Tate Date Reported: 2017-01-23 Held by: Ben Campbell (IESG) Section: GLOBAL Original Text ------------- To: ;tag=428765950880801 Corrected Text -------------- To: Notes ----- PUBLISH must not contain To tag unless sending within dialog. The To tag (428765950880801) appears to be extraneous within the following SIP messages since there is no explanation about which dialog is being shared: section 11.7 F32, section 11.9 F32, section 11.10 F22, and section 11.14 F48. The To/From URI values within section 11.7 F32 also should be swapped since it does not appear to be intentional and is different than the other examples indicating To tag value 428765950880801. Section 11.4 F2 also has To tag issues since a To tag must be present to comply with RFC 3261. Section 11.6 F28 also should not be missing a To tag. -------------------------------------- RFC7463 (draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-15) -------------------------------------- Title : Shared Appearances of a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Address of Record (AOR) Publication Date : March 2015 Author(s) : A. Johnston, Ed., M. Soroushnejad, Ed., V. Venkataramanan Category : PROPOSED STANDARD Source : Basic Level of Interoperability for SIP Services Area : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure Stream : IETF Verifying Party : IESG