Subject: [dispatch] Comments on draft-vanelburg-dispatch-private-network-ind-02

From: [email-masked] (Dale R. Worley)
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 11:21:30 -0400 (EDT)

The abstract of -02 is:

   This document specifies the SIP P-Private-Network-Indication P-header
   used by the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP).  The use of
   this private network indication extension is only applicable inside
   an administrative domain with previously agreed-upon policies for
   generation, transport and usage of such information.  A private
   network indication allows nodes in such a domain to treat private
   network traffic according to a different set of rules than the set
   applicable to public network traffic.  The indication also
   distinguishes traffic from one private network from another private
   network.

What is absent from the abstract is a statement telling what the
header *means*.  E.g., "The P-Private-Network-Indication indicates
that the message is part of the message traffic of a private network,
and identifies that private network."

Given that the proposed header name is 28 characters long, some
thought should be given to abbreviating it.

Dale

---

From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 18:44:27 +0000

Read section 1.3 for reasons not to change the name of the header field.

I also think the abstract is long enough as it is and your proposed sentence can be inferred from the text, sufficiently for bibliographies and so on to identify what the document is about. To include what you want, what would you delete?

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
> Behalf Of Dale R. Worley
> Sent: 29 August 2013 16:22
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: [dispatch] Comments on draft-vanelburg-dispatch-private-network-
> ind-02
> 
> The abstract of -02 is:
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

---

From: [email-masked] (Dale R. Worley)
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 10:26:42 -0400 (EDT)

> From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <[email-masked]>
> 
> I also think the abstract is long enough as it is and your proposed
> sentence can be inferred from the text, sufficiently for
> bibliographies and so on to identify what the document is about. To
> include what you want, what would you delete?

I'd say that everything in the abstract can be inferred from the text,
but the point of an abstract is that you should be able to read it
without reading the text and yet know what the text is about.  I think
you've been thinking about PPNI long enough that you don't notice that
its purpose isn't obvious to the naive reader.

In regard to the size of the abstract, certainly you could omit
sentence 4, "The indication also distinguishes traffic from one
private network from another private network." as that would be
redundant after adding my proposed sentence between sentences 1 and 2.
If that isn't sufficient, I would propose removing sentence 2, "The
use of ...", as that is pretty much common to all P- headers (and is
stated in detail in section 1.2), and isn't as important as describing
what the header is *for*.

So I propose this as an improved abstract:

    This document specifies the SIP P-Private-Network-Indication
    P-header used by the 3rd-Generation Partnership Project (3GPP).
    The P-Private-Network-Indication indicates that the message is
    part of the message traffic of a private network, and identifies
    that private network.  A private network indication allows nodes
    to treat private network traffic according to a different set of
    rules than the set applicable to public network traffic.

Dale