6 Jul 2011 22:02
Re: Comments on draft-ietf-bliss-shared-appearances-07
(Despite the Subject: line, which is the Subject: of the message I am replying to, all text references in my new text are to the -08 version.) Only the items which have an ongoing discussion: > > BTW, is the latest decision that appearance numbers start with 0, > > rather than 1? > > No, the decision was that appearance numbers start at 1. I think I > have found all the cases of appearance zero and removed them from the > document now. OK. > > But this leads to the point that there is no clear, separate > > description of the fundamental protocol action, viz., the UA sends a > > PUBLISH to the Appearance Agent to request an appearance assignment > > and the Appearance Agent sends a NOTIFY back to the UA with the final > > assignment. > > This UA behavior is described in Section 5.3. I would prefer to leave > it there rather than move it to this section. OK. I think I wrote my original objection when I was reading 5.2 (and noticing that it was discussing actions) but had not yet read 5.3. > > BTW, is there a default value for "exclusive"? The schema doesn't > > show one. > > I clarified that it is false, the same as if it is not present. I(Continue reading)
RSS Feed