Subject: [SIP] 1 quick editorial comment on draft-ietf-sip-call-flows-02.txt

From: "Jean-Francois Mule" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2000 10:23:54 -0800

In the section "General Assumptions", the wording of the paragraphs seems to
imply hard requirements on gws and proxies beyond these call flow examples:
1/ "No authentication of Gateways is  shown, since it is *assumed* that:..."
2/ "Two types of Gateways are *described* in this document
3/ "Gateways provide tones (ringing, busy, etc) and announcements. ..."

--- Suggestions:
- It would be approprieate to add ... for the  purpose of these examples...
to those paragraphs (each of them).
- Another suggestion would be to use *may* instead  of will... ,
  Something like:
For the purpose of these call flow examples, it is assumed that no gateway
authentication is required (Gateways *may* only accept calls routed  ...,
proxies *may* perform client authentication, etc.)
  or like:
Gateways *may* provide tones (ringing, busy, etc) and announcements to the
PSTN side based on SIP response messages, or may pass along audio in-band
tones (ringing, busy tone, etc.) in an early media stream to the SIP side.

I believe this goes along the comment Jonathan made at the meeting today to
add a general disclaimer.

Jean-Francois
Clarent

_______________________________________________
SIP mailing list
[email-masked]
http://lists.bell-labs.com/mailman/listinfo/sip