Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-websocket-08
review-ietf-sipcore-sip-websocket-08-genart-lc-krishnan-2013-04-29-00

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
draft-ietf-sipcore-sip-websocket-08

For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<

http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html

>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed
Standard, but has some minor issues that need to be fixed.

* Section 4.1

There is no error handling specified. i.e. What happens if the server
does not send a 101 reply with sip in the Sec-WebSocket-Protocol header?

* Section 5.2

The updated ABNF provided in section 5.2.1. is confusing. e.g. RFC4168
specifies the entire transport rule as follows

transport         =  "UDP" / "TCP" / "TLS" / "SCTP" / "TLS-SCTP"
                        / other-transport

while this document just uses an incremental alternative and calls it an
updated rule. I would have expected an *updated* rule to say

transport         =  "UDP" / "TCP" / "TLS" / "SCTP" / "TLS-SCTP" / "WS"
		        / "WSS" / other-transport

* Section 5.2.2

RFC4168 does not update transport-param. Is this a copy and paste error?

* Section 5.2.4

Maybe it is just me, but the way I read it, this section leaves the
client without any mandatory to implement transport protocol for SIP
since it relaxes the need to implement UDP and TCP, as well as allowing
the implementation of the websocket transport using a MAY.

Thanks
Suresh