Subject: AW: [Sipping] Internet Draft on ETSI TISPAN requirements for simulationservices defined within EITSI TISPAN

From: "Tschofenig, Hannes" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 17:15:59 +0200

hi all, 

a small comment only: if the document says 'requirements' then the document should contain requirements only and should avoid solution specific discussions. providing some text that motivates and explains the requirement is typically helpful (see for example http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-schulzrinne-ecrit-requirements-00.txt). 

use the RFC 2119 terminology, if possible. to help the reader to understand the requirements try to avoid the introduction of complicated terms. 

ciao
hannes

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] Im Auftrag von Dale Worley
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 25. Mai 2005 16:26
> An: Sipping (E-mail)
> Betreff: [Sipping] Internet Draft on ETSI TISPAN requirements 
> for simulationservices defined within EITSI TISPAN
> 
> 
> > From: Jesske, R [[email-masked]]
> >
> > Dear all,
> > I would like to draw you attention to the following draft 
> that is now
> available.
> >
> >
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jesske-sipping-tispa
n-requirements
-00.txt

Dear Herr Jesske,

I don't wish to sound like a curmugeon about a document which has clearly
been worked on by a number of good people, but I think that version 00 needs
some editing.  It reads as if it was written by telecom people for telecom
people, and unfortunately, it would be difficult for Internet people to read
without a considerable effort.

For example, consider the *first two sentences* of the Overview:  "ETSI
TISPAN is defining the release 1 of the TISPAN NGN.  Generally the TISPAN
NGN bases on the 3GPP IMS Release 7 provided by 3GPP in 2005."  It contains
no less than 5 acronyms  I am unfamiliar with:  ETSI, TISPAN, NGN, 3GPP,
IMS.  This is sub-optimal for a paragraph which is intended to *introduce*
the subject of the I-D.

Given the aggressive schedule, I would suggest that you engage the
assistance of someone who has been heavily involved in SIP (but not
telephony) to ensure that your document is clear from the point of view of
the SIP community.

As a technical advance, this I-D is very exciting, because it appears to be
constructing the means to make SIP interwork (almost) seamlessly with PSTN
advanced call control features.  It would be a shame if it was not
incorporated into the SIP world because it was not explained will to the SIP
community.

Best regards,

Dale

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

_______________________________________________
Sipping mailing list  https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sipping
This list is for NEW development of the application of SIP
Use [email-masked] for questions on current sip
Use [email-masked] for new developments of core SIP

---

From: Miguel Garcia <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 14:13:30 +0300

Well, here I disagree. The ultimate goal of the document is to have a 
standard working solution that satisfies the requirements. We list the 
requirements (for which I agree we need to polish them), and we suggest 
solutions that we have been thinking that will meet the requirement.

As an example, RFC 4083 follows the same approach: it lists the 
requirements and points out to solutions when those are known to meet 
the requirements.

You also mentioned RFC 2119, an RFC that is IMHO applicable to standards 
track RFCs, but is not that reasonable to be applied to requirement 
documents. Just the abstract of RFC 2119 indicates that the intention is 
to apply that terminology to standards track RFC, and later each of the 
terms are defined in terms of "the specification".

/Miguel

-- 
Miguel A. Garcia           tel:+358-50-4804586
sip:[email-masked]
Nokia Research Center      Helsinki, Finland