Hi!











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




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




comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of the 




IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included in AD reviews 




during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments 




just like any other last call comments. 













Summary: Ready with Minor Comments and Nits










This document describes the SIP call flows to perform call recording, including metadata snapshots, from a SIP client to a session recording ser










Major:










None.










Minor:










1. No Normative References.










I am surprised to see there is nothing that needs to be understood from other RFCs in order to make sense of this one.










Sentences like:










   The terms using in this document are defined in [RFC7865] and


   [RFC6341].  No new definitions are introduced in this document.










and










   Security considerations mentioned in [RFC7865] and [RFC7866] has to


   be followed by SRC and SRS for setting up RS SIP dialog and sending




   metadata.













Seem to support the fact that some of these RFCs need to be referenced Normatively instead of Informationally.



















2. This is an editorial but for clarity. The figures in Sections 3.2.1, 3.2.2, etc. include two separate things: A call-flow line, and a message contents. These should be two separate figures with appropriate legends, for clarity.










Nits:










There is an Unused Reference:













  == Unused Reference: 'RFC6230' is defined on line 1405, but no explicit




     reference was found in the text










There are some grammatical nits that should be fixed, e.g.:










2.  Terminology







   The terms using in this document are defined in [RFC7865] and




   [RFC6341].  No new definitions are introduced in this document.










“used"








3.  Metadata XML Instances







   The following sub-sections has examples showing the metadata snapshot




   sent from SRC to SRS.  In all these use-cases, the SRC is a B2BUA.













“have”, “contain”.










Also, “B2BUA” (Back-to-Back User Agent) needs to be expanded on use (or added to the Terminology section.













Best,










—




















Carlos Pignataro, 

carlos at cisco.com







“Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis."