Subject: [P2PSIP] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts-08: (with COMMENT)

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 20:32:14 -0700

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts-08: Yes

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-p2psip-concepts/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for doing this. I wish more of our protocols had high-level
concept descriptions like this.

- 1, first paragraph:
I was slightly surprised not to see the word "rendezvous" turn up here.
It's not critical, but it's a term that has meaning to a lot of
"conventional SIP " people.

- 2.2, last paragraph:
While I assume the client in the first sentence is the conventional SIP
client mentioned further down the paragraph, the initial paragraph
structure led me to expect you to call the special peer offering the SIP
registrar service a "client".

- 2.5, first paragraph:
consider expanding "zeroconf" to "zero configuration"

-6: I’m not going to push the matter this late in the process, but there
might have been an opportunity to describe the security concepts of
p2psip at a similar level of detail.