Subject: [sip-clf] Interim Meeting - Minutes

From: Peter Musgrave <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:15:31 -0500

SIP-CLF Interim Jan 19, 2011
=======================
Peter Musgrave (chair)
Robert Sparks (AD)
Brian Trammel
Hadriel Kaplan
John Elwell
Vijay Gurbani
Gonzalo Salguerio
Chris Lonvick

Slides are archived on the WG Wiki as attachments http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/sipclf/trac/wiki 

Vijay - Problem statement
------------------------------------
slide 2 - no discussion - ok
slide 4 - log SDP only (Peter/Hadriel ok)
What about ISUP bodies in INFOs? Could do vendor specific as hex
NOTIFY messages? Bodies may be useful…XML bodies can be logged as vendor extension?
Do we care if different vendors do the same logging for e.g. CONFERENCE events
e.g. SIP MESSAGE MESSAGE
- try a straw proposal for application XML
Slide 5 (Vendor extensions)
- RFC5424 (use PEN - private enterprise number)
- Chris is ok with this…

Gonzalo S. - Representation
---------------------------------------
- should the delimiter be tab, space, any whitespace burst etc?
- spaces can appear inside fields (as can most other delimiters we choose)
- how do delimiters interact with shell tools (rep, cut, awk)
- issue needs further discussion on the list

Slide 7 (missing and unparsable fields)
- the SHOULD at the bottom should be a must
- what if headers is %2D? (turtles all the way down)
- text on escaping in RFC5424 is worth looking at

Slide 8
- tag=value vs more cryptic TLV format
- some concern about adding quotes around values (since some fields will contain quotes)
- this issue exists for almost any delimiter
- essentially a matter of "taste" - go to the list for a sense of what flavour has more support

Discussion: Useful to have concrete examples of how to log content for SDP and XML bodies. Vijay has a digraph (?) proposoal he will take to the list.

Peter: Deadlines for Prague are Mar 7 for format and Mar 14th for problem statement. 

Thanks to all for their continued work on this.