Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix-
review-ietf-sip-record-route-fix-secdir-lc-lonvick-2009-07-03-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 10)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2009-07-07
Requested 2009-06-25
Authors Thomas Froment , Ben Bonnaerens , Christophe Lebel
I-D last updated 2009-07-03
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -?? by Chris M. Lonvick
Assignment Reviewer Chris M. Lonvick
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-sip-record-route-fix by Security Area Directorate Assigned
Completed 2009-07-03
review-ietf-sip-record-route-fix-secdir-lc-lonvick-2009-07-03-00
Hi,



I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 


ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. 


These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area 


directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments 


just like any other last call comments.






The document explans the problems with SIP record route recommendations 


from prior documents and proposes a solution that should result in 


consistent behaviour.  While I am not intimately familiar with SIP and SIP 


proxying, I think that this is a good thing.




The Security Considerations section is appropriate for this document.



I did come across two nits in my review.  The first is that the Abstract 


contains "sip" and "sips" but those are all uppercase throughout the rest 


of the document.  The rest of that paragraph could use some scrutiny as 


well to make some parts of it more clear.






Also, the third paragraph in section 5 talks about a "spiral".  That 


concept is not defined in this document so I couldn't tell if it is a good 


thing, or a bad thing.




Regards,
Chris