The Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) P-Refused-URI-List Private-Header (P-Header)
RFC 5318

[Ballot discuss]
The draft uses non-RFC2606 domain names in examples; some of
these (e.g. "example3.com") actually exist and are owned by
someone. I'd suggest changing to RFC 2606 names, unless there
are really good reasons not to do so.

[Ballot comment]
This line from section 9:

>      encrypted.  Therefore it is RECOMMENDED that either hop-by-hop or
>      end-to-end encryption is used.

would be better if it provided references to the specific technologies
that can be used to provide such encryption.

Jon: The "Personnel" section of the ballot write-up is incomplete.  Is that intentional?

IANA Last Call comments:

Action #1:

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
assignment in the "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Parameters"
registry at http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters
sub-registry "Header Fields"

Header Name        compact  Reference
------------------  -------  ---------
P-Refused-URI-List        [RFC-hautakorpi-sipping-uri-list-handling-refused-03]


Action #2

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
assignment in the "Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Parameters"
registry at http://www.iana.org/assignments/sip-parameters
sub-registry "Header Field Parameters and Parameter Values"

Predefined
Header Field            Parameter Name  Values    Reference
----------------------  ---------------  --------  ---------
P-Refused-URI-List      members          No [RFC-hautakorpi-sipping-uri-list-handling-refused-03]


We understand the above to be the only IANA Actions for this
document.