IETF Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sipcore-rfc7976bis-02
review-ietf-sipcore-rfc7976bis-02-artart-lc-fenton-2025-05-26-00

I am the designated ARTART reviewer for this draft.

This document is well written and appears to be ready for publication as an
Informational RFC.

Minor issue: I would prefer if the New Text in Section 3 used normative terms
(probably MAY in most cases) for consistency with IETF style. However, the way
it is written is consistent with the wording in Section 5.7 of RFC7315, so this
may be a reason to stick with the current "can" wording. Presumably none of the
named header fields are mandatory in any of the named requests and responses;
if some are, more precise normative terminology is needed.