From gsalguei@cisco.com  Tue May  1 01:53:17 2012
Return-Path: <gsalguei@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CFDA21F86D4 for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue,  1 May 2012 01:53:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XzayvBUzPUQF for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue,  1 May 2012 01:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from av-tac-sj.cisco.com (firebird.cisco.com [171.68.227.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF12221F86C9 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Tue,  1 May 2012 01:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-TACSUNS: Virus Scanned
Received: from bonfire.cisco.com (localhost.cisco.com [127.0.0.1]) by av-tac-sj.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q418rF8g014939 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 May 2012 01:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.21.86.251] ([10.21.86.251]) by bonfire.cisco.com (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q418rC9U018836;  Tue, 1 May 2012 01:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
From: Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F9EDD13.6010507@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 04:53:08 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <3D98ACB6-FD8B-43C6-9A96-5B83712CCC35@cisco.com>
References: <4F21DD3E.7000002@nostrum.com> <31A5C897-B767-4527-9346-905A80977F35@cisco.com> <4F9EDD13.6010507@nostrum.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
Cc: draft-ietf-sipclf-format@tools.ietf.org, sipclf-chairs@tools.ietf.org, "sip-clf@ietf.org Mailing" <sip-clf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sip-clf] AD review: draft-ietf-sipclf-format-05
X-BeenThere: sip-clf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Common Log File format discussion list <sip-clf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-clf>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-clf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 08:53:17 -0000

Thanks for the feedback Robert. I'm traveling this week but I'll look =
through your other email and provide responses to your individual =
comments. Once we settle on the text I'll produce an -07 version for you =
to take to the IESG.

Cheers,

Gonzalo

On Apr 30, 2012, at 2:42 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:

> Hi Gonzalo -
>=20
> I'm going through all the messages in the threads since the original =
publication request of -05.
> There are some things we discuss below that still need touching in -06
> (I'm preparing an evaluation of -06 separately and will include these =
in that message, but wanted to reply here to make it easier for everyone =
to follow the context)
>=20
> On 2/8/12 6:25 PM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote:
>> Robert -
>>=20
>> Thanks for your thorough and thoughtful review. Below are some inline =
comments to your feedback.
>>=20
>> I will release the -06 version of the draft once we have settled on =
all of the below points you have raised.
>>=20
>>=20
>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 6:09 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
>>=20
>>> AD review: draft-ietf-sipclf-format-05
>>>=20
>>> Summary: This document has open issues to address before progressing =
to IETF LC
>>>=20
>>> Major (mostly in document order)
>>>=20
> <snip/>
>>> 5) The document should more explicitly discuss the decision to =
replace
>>> tabs with spaces. That decision was based on there being no known =
use
>>> of tabs in SIP messages that means something semantically other than
>>> whitespace. The discussion should point that out, and note that you
>>> will not be able to use the logged information to reconstruct a
>>> signature over the logged fields, and that any future (or =
proprietary)
>>> SIP header fields that include tabs with semantic meaning (carrying =
a
>>> blob perhaps) will lose this meaning while being logged. It should =
also
>>> be made brutally explicit whether you want this substitution to =
happen
>>> when you are logging the entire message, or a body (that might =
happen
>>> to have tabs in it).
>>=20
>> We will add a new paragraph that goes something
>> like this (the new paragraph is added at the end of S4.2 paragraph
>> "This data MUST appear ... (0x20) prior to being logged."):
>>=20
>> The decision to replace tabs with spaces was based on there
>> being no known use of tabs in SIP messages to convey any other
>> meaning than whitespace.  Two consequences of the decision to
>> replace tab with a space character are: (a) it will become
>> impossible to reconstruct a signature over the logged field that
>> matches the signature over fields in the original SIP message,
>> and (b) any future SIP header fields that include tabs with a
>> different semantic meaning than simply signifying whitespace
>> will loose this meaning when logged.  And finally, the tabs to
>> spaces substitution MUST occur when logging mandatory fields;
>> it SHOULD occur when when logging either the entire message or
>> simply a SIP body.
> Why SHOULD? When would you violate that SHOULD?
>=20
>=20
> <snip/>
>>> Minor
>>>=20
>=20
>>> There are blocks of text in this document that are really laying out =
the problem.
>>> Can they be moved into the problem statement/information =
model/framework document
>>> or simply deleted?
>>> For example: "Implementing a logging scheme for SIP is a =
considerable challenge.",
>>> "Whilst one may question the value of the =46rom URI [...]", etc.
>>=20
>> Ok. I'll scour the document for instances of such text and remove =
them.
> The "considerable challenge" sentence remains in -06?
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>> In section 4.2's description of the To tag field you say "Value of =
the
>>> tag parameter (if present)" but don't talk about what to do if the =
tag
>>> parameter isn't present. In the parallel section on the =46rom tag, =
you
>>> don't talk about the potential for messages without =46rom tags. If =
it's
>>> the intent to not be able to log messages from legacy 2543 devices, =
that's
>>> fine, but the document should call that out as a design decision and =
it wouldn't
>>> hurt to provide some guidance on what to do if such a message shows =
up.
>>=20
>> I'll add some text to clarify and simplify this. Basically, if the =
tag is present in To and From,
>> it is logged. If it is not present, a "-" is logged. I'll leave it at =
that. The intent is not
>> to differentiate between messages from legacy rfc2543 devices versus =
the
>> updated rfc3261.
>>=20
> I'm not easily finding new text? If it's there, pointing at it from =
the descriptions in 4.2 will help.
>=20
>=20


From musgravepj@gmail.com  Tue May  1 02:50:49 2012
Return-Path: <musgravepj@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D08521F875B for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue,  1 May 2012 02:50:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.001,  BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6ofQ2OHlzlKO for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue,  1 May 2012 02:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-iy0-f172.google.com (mail-iy0-f172.google.com [209.85.210.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B1E121F8759 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Tue,  1 May 2012 02:50:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by iazz13 with SMTP id z13so6520030iaz.31 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Tue, 01 May 2012 02:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=XERyMw6uwUH5Yxcm+x+sRAQSrC2vVs96L1eTughN0JE=; b=JKl9IRGdPh3Eft0SEUFnGdM8maW8shKnbBWfdkLgvl0cyKXEpMS46/N8ocbWIhVkue mnaKG5OJY7ldfBZ/2ps2RoCi02iJR+h6tyxWurBDdgxXdJh/3DNTdUcrVZsR5Tp7Zx46 FEs06EuMhR18N2QLAUMhwq+SeTr8PXFxpX5YDyjwlhKctuq+Lkp7lQpcT8koTsz+uiTg Z6htSADG/tkGtE3+/XwuGDsNXUfIFa/JIzin7YnBg/QLv3LME5Ms1ZtaWn6pbtcmQQUo kYOrDVWZIRd7ATRxhxGrGxaG/abXzNB+Q8v1N+gmeBklYN/1MaJ8F95xLMLT1jxj3O7U R6XQ==
Received: by 10.42.123.66 with SMTP id q2mr1789336icr.52.1335865847494; Tue, 01 May 2012 02:50:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.105] ([204.237.33.112]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id cg9sm40514091igb.17.2012.05.01.02.50.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 01 May 2012 02:50:46 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Peter Musgrave <musgravepj@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <3D98ACB6-FD8B-43C6-9A96-5B83712CCC35@cisco.com>
Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 05:50:46 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BB265B03-0144-4B39-82ED-8B5A40F02069@gmail.com>
References: <4F21DD3E.7000002@nostrum.com> <31A5C897-B767-4527-9346-905A80977F35@cisco.com> <4F9EDD13.6010507@nostrum.com> <3D98ACB6-FD8B-43C6-9A96-5B83712CCC35@cisco.com>
To: Gonzalo Salgueiro <gsalguei@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
Cc: draft-ietf-sipclf-format@tools.ietf.org, sipclf-chairs@tools.ietf.org, "sip-clf@ietf.org Mailing" <sip-clf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [sip-clf] AD review: draft-ietf-sipclf-format-05
X-BeenThere: sip-clf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Common Log File format discussion list <sip-clf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-clf>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-clf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 09:50:49 -0000

Thanks Gonzalo and Robert,

Based on Robert's earlier email about 06 and the number of changes, once =
we have 07 I will push for some additional scrutiny by the WG and do a =
WGLC.

Can I call for volunteers to review? The diffs since -05 will be the key =
areas to focus on.

Thanks all,

Peter

On 2012-05-01, at 4:53 AM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback Robert. I'm traveling this week but I'll look =
through your other email and provide responses to your individual =
comments. Once we settle on the text I'll produce an -07 version for you =
to take to the IESG.
>=20
> Cheers,
>=20
> Gonzalo
>=20
> On Apr 30, 2012, at 2:42 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
>=20
>> Hi Gonzalo -
>>=20
>> I'm going through all the messages in the threads since the original =
publication request of -05.
>> There are some things we discuss below that still need touching in =
-06
>> (I'm preparing an evaluation of -06 separately and will include these =
in that message, but wanted to reply here to make it easier for everyone =
to follow the context)
>>=20
>> On 2/8/12 6:25 PM, Gonzalo Salgueiro wrote:
>>> Robert -
>>>=20
>>> Thanks for your thorough and thoughtful review. Below are some =
inline comments to your feedback.
>>>=20
>>> I will release the -06 version of the draft once we have settled on =
all of the below points you have raised.
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 6:09 PM, Robert Sparks wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> AD review: draft-ietf-sipclf-format-05
>>>>=20
>>>> Summary: This document has open issues to address before =
progressing to IETF LC
>>>>=20
>>>> Major (mostly in document order)
>>>>=20
>> <snip/>
>>>> 5) The document should more explicitly discuss the decision to =
replace
>>>> tabs with spaces. That decision was based on there being no known =
use
>>>> of tabs in SIP messages that means something semantically other =
than
>>>> whitespace. The discussion should point that out, and note that you
>>>> will not be able to use the logged information to reconstruct a
>>>> signature over the logged fields, and that any future (or =
proprietary)
>>>> SIP header fields that include tabs with semantic meaning (carrying =
a
>>>> blob perhaps) will lose this meaning while being logged. It should =
also
>>>> be made brutally explicit whether you want this substitution to =
happen
>>>> when you are logging the entire message, or a body (that might =
happen
>>>> to have tabs in it).
>>>=20
>>> We will add a new paragraph that goes something
>>> like this (the new paragraph is added at the end of S4.2 paragraph
>>> "This data MUST appear ... (0x20) prior to being logged."):
>>>=20
>>> The decision to replace tabs with spaces was based on there
>>> being no known use of tabs in SIP messages to convey any other
>>> meaning than whitespace.  Two consequences of the decision to
>>> replace tab with a space character are: (a) it will become
>>> impossible to reconstruct a signature over the logged field that
>>> matches the signature over fields in the original SIP message,
>>> and (b) any future SIP header fields that include tabs with a
>>> different semantic meaning than simply signifying whitespace
>>> will loose this meaning when logged.  And finally, the tabs to
>>> spaces substitution MUST occur when logging mandatory fields;
>>> it SHOULD occur when when logging either the entire message or
>>> simply a SIP body.
>> Why SHOULD? When would you violate that SHOULD?
>>=20
>>=20
>> <snip/>
>>>> Minor
>>>>=20
>>=20
>>>> There are blocks of text in this document that are really laying =
out the problem.
>>>> Can they be moved into the problem statement/information =
model/framework document
>>>> or simply deleted?
>>>> For example: "Implementing a logging scheme for SIP is a =
considerable challenge.",
>>>> "Whilst one may question the value of the =46rom URI [...]", etc.
>>>=20
>>> Ok. I'll scour the document for instances of such text and remove =
them.
>> The "considerable challenge" sentence remains in -06?
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>=20
>>>> In section 4.2's description of the To tag field you say "Value of =
the
>>>> tag parameter (if present)" but don't talk about what to do if the =
tag
>>>> parameter isn't present. In the parallel section on the =46rom tag, =
you
>>>> don't talk about the potential for messages without =46rom tags. If =
it's
>>>> the intent to not be able to log messages from legacy 2543 devices, =
that's
>>>> fine, but the document should call that out as a design decision =
and it wouldn't
>>>> hurt to provide some guidance on what to do if such a message shows =
up.
>>>=20
>>> I'll add some text to clarify and simplify this. Basically, if the =
tag is present in To and From,
>>> it is logged. If it is not present, a "-" is logged. I'll leave it =
at that. The intent is not
>>> to differentiate between messages from legacy rfc2543 devices versus =
the
>>> updated rfc3261.
>>>=20
>> I'm not easily finding new text? If it's there, pointing at it from =
the descriptions in 4.2 will help.
>>=20
>>=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> sip-clf mailing list
> sip-clf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf


From sandks@cisco.com  Tue May  1 20:07:46 2012
Return-Path: <sandks@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59F6721E80D0 for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue,  1 May 2012 20:07:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OxrKwH2nr0dt for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue,  1 May 2012 20:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bgl-iport-2.cisco.com (bgl-iport-2.cisco.com [72.163.197.26]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 430DE21E8045 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Tue,  1 May 2012 20:07:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=sandks@cisco.com; l=3400; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1335928065; x=1337137665; h=mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date: message-id:from:to:cc; bh=SJ0dmceQUTPA5AEOXEbhG+YP/oZ6La4IIYGU9fn3Be8=; b=cL3MoLvqCiMdqPQQh6jsznJnhVgXOJ7wTqCASYz55jOSdjlL7MDxQPLt BIqH5ewjgCioUZAGI/D7aLbEfUoS/ENuLu/gpmrpK9xQkl7/geCD3NuAd tqbfeah58BY0QncL8ABVTOE3rtAfkNMoRicdhARSxlhIq2yOt2AmT/oPy s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ar8EADOkoE9Io8UY/2dsb2JhbABEhWmqEYFygheCCQEBAQQSARANBDcMAgwGARkEAQEDAgYGFwECAgMBRAkJAQQLCAgTB4drmkeNE5I5gS+MNIINNWMEiGKbdYFpgnA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,514,1330905600"; d="scan'208";a="11246740"
Received: from vla196-nat.cisco.com (HELO bgl-core-4.cisco.com) ([72.163.197.24]) by bgl-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 May 2012 03:07:43 +0000
Received: from xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com (xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com [72.163.129.201]) by bgl-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q4237h0C029914 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 May 2012 03:07:43 GMT
Received: from xmb-bgl-418.cisco.com ([72.163.129.214]) by xbh-bgl-411.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675);  Wed, 2 May 2012 08:37:43 +0530
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 08:37:39 +0530
Message-ID: <2D490F9E9907974589E48127DD01C850076A4041@XMB-BGL-418.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: [REMINDER]: New Version Notification fordraft-kaithal-sipclf-sip-log-information-00.txt
Thread-Index: Ac0WF093GAZflxcbRlaKXV1QZy0yCAAAA87wAAA+zTAEff9pgA==
From: "Sandeep K.S (sandks)" <sandks@cisco.com>
To: <sip-clf@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 May 2012 03:07:43.0272 (UTC) FILETIME=[BDCFEA80:01CD2810]
Cc: "Adarsh Kaithal \(akaithal\)" <akaithal@cisco.com>
Subject: [sip-clf] [REMINDER]: New Version Notification fordraft-kaithal-sipclf-sip-log-information-00.txt
X-BeenThere: sip-clf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Common Log File format discussion list <sip-clf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-clf>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-clf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 03:07:46 -0000
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From musgravepj@gmail.com  Wed May  2 03:08:45 2012
Return-Path: <musgravepj@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FCD721F8AF3 for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  2 May 2012 03:08:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000,  BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wmmgmz53h-Fp for <sip-clf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed,  2 May 2012 03:08:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84D2621F8A39 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Wed,  2 May 2012 03:08:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yenq7 with SMTP id q7so566059yen.31 for <sip-clf@ietf.org>; Wed, 02 May 2012 03:08:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:mime-version:content-type:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; bh=TMTqTU6sPaT2fF1NE0flQHoBjM9JD8VATIFEZvKa2uA=; b=o7uR2Y/5/6++ZwZ2Jlra4w3+HxTYyugFmEKDLQOl1eByIW1x9r8NUQcJlElB8KSqSC z7Q4a2054gIFSAEgST2ZWpJVagd1GaI5y8u7d5GzOFxywKLtAmrV5PEVgDMmt5e3Ba90 bOECdD7WAoQj3XAEU8vNLZYLKBsdHnxRgkSjQoQsrLZ5uPc9y+ZZafGbrOljjarGEQ0g +ODIJ4JtVGVXUjT4b1x/pwVe+3wdvBaIuTRmTQzm9JsnGbfXnJG19EbpuCtnrbHOGGmv kdvXvTAhblpVoMhF6+NWA+7hI8ASzQw++Q+CIyKe3jLh7DSnn1IZ1pWFV4FODTSlvUoi LEzQ==
Received: by 10.50.222.170 with SMTP id qn10mr4105827igc.57.1335953323889; Wed, 02 May 2012 03:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.105] ([204.237.33.112]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id cg9sm1907863igb.17.2012.05.02.03.08.42 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 02 May 2012 03:08:43 -0700 (PDT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1257)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Peter Musgrave <musgravepj@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2D490F9E9907974589E48127DD01C850076A4041@XMB-BGL-418.cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 06:08:47 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E3C67111-956C-46C7-A04F-3EF9DEA46379@gmail.com>
References: <2D490F9E9907974589E48127DD01C850076A4041@XMB-BGL-418.cisco.com>
To: "Sandeep K.S (sandks)" <sandks@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1257)
Cc: sip-clf@ietf.org, "Adarsh Kaithal \(akaithal\)" <akaithal@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [sip-clf] [REMINDER]: New Version Notification fordraft-kaithal-sipclf-sip-log-information-00.txt
X-BeenThere: sip-clf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIP Common Log File format discussion list <sip-clf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sip-clf>
List-Post: <mailto:sip-clf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf>, <mailto:sip-clf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 10:08:45 -0000

Hi Sandeep,

Thanks for bringing this to my attention.

Your document describes a new SIP header and the sip-clf group is not =
chartered to discuss SIP message changes.=20

I would suggest you submit this to the DISPATCH working group and see if =
that community thinks it belongs in an existing WG or how it can be =
advanced.=20

Regards,=20

Peter

On 2012-05-01, at 11:07 PM, Sandeep K.S (sandks) wrote:

> Hello Folks,
>=20
> We had submitted this draft sometime back. We haven't heard any =
comments from this group. Kindly requesting folks to review this and =
provide your expert comments/inputs/suggestion, if any.
>=20
> Regards
> Sandeep
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandeep K.S (sandks)=20
> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 11:50 AM
> To: 'sip-clf@ietf.org'
> Cc: Adarsh Kaithal (akaithal)
> Subject: FW: New Version Notification =
fordraft-kaithal-sipclf-sip-log-information-00.txt
>=20
> Hello Folks,
>=20
> We have submitted a new individual draft related to supporting =
enablement and logging of required SIP debugs on all the SIP entities in =
a VoIP network.
>=20
> Requesting you to review the draft and provide your expert comments =
and inputs.
>=20
> Regards
> Sandeep
>=20
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
>> Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 11:39 AM
>> To: Adarsh Kaithal (akaithal)
>> Subject: New Version Notification fordraft-kaithal-sipclf-sip-log-=20
>> information-00.txt
>>=20
>> A new version of I-D, draft-kaithal-sipclf-sip-log-information-00.txt
>> has been successfully submitted by Adarsh Kaithal and posted to the=20=

>> IETF repository.
>>=20
>> Filename:	 draft-kaithal-sipclf-sip-log-information
>> Revision:	 00
>> Title:		 Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Extension for
>> logging and debugging
>> Creation date:	 2012-04-09
>> WG ID:		 Individual Submission
>> Number of pages: 8
>>=20
>> Abstract:
>>   The current mechanisms to debug issues in SIP network are not very
>>   efficient.  It requires to enable debugging logs across different
>>   devices, recreate the problem and then collect the logs.  The idea =
is
>>   to provide a solution to automatically enable relevant logs (SIP
>>   messages and any other debugging logs meaningful to SIP devices), =
and
>>   also to indicate where the logs are to be collected or stored.  The
>>   enabling of logs will happen at all the SIP devices(upstream or
>>   downstream).  This will help to get the logs from all the SIP =
devices
>>   in a Common logging format (CLF).  The solution extends SIP to
>>   provide the infrastructure to enable logging for upstream and
>>   downstream devices with each server deciding how much =
troubleshooting
>>   information it wants to log - with freedom to simply ignore =
requests
>>   if required.  This document specifies a new header called
>> &quot;Log- Me&quot;
>>   Header in all the SIP messages.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> The IETF Secretariat
> _______________________________________________
> sip-clf mailing list
> sip-clf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sip-clf