Subject: [siprec] comments on draft-portman-siprec-protocol-03

From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 11:49:12 -0700

I have a few comments on this draft.

Section 2, Definitions. Reference definitions in architecture draft
instead or repeating here.

Section 4, "there are a couple" -> "there are several"

Figure 2. "RS INVITE (CallId + Participants) with SDP" seems to imply
participant info is in SIP headers. This is not the intention, is it?

Figure 4, title should change from "via SIP INFO" to via SIP UPDATE
request".

Section 5, change "does not have to have live within" to "does not have
to live within".

Section 5, remove last sentence regarding session timer.

Section 5.1.1, is it also the intention of the src feature tag that it
be used by a recording aware UA to identify/locate an SRC

Section 5.1.2, is it also the intention to be able to use this to
indicate ability to be an src or srs?

Section 5.2, reference RFC 3264.

Section 5.2, change "As SRS only receives RTP streams from SRS" to from
"SRC".

Section 5.3.2, change "may conveyed" to "may be conveyed".

Section 6.1, why is recording-aware an SDP attribute instead of a SIP
feature tag?

Section 6.3, instead of defining pref = "record" / "norecord" / "pause"
/ "resume" can we reuse indication = "on" / "off" / "paused"?

Cheers,
Charles