Re: Evaluation: draft-ietf-simple-presence - A Presence Event Packagefor the Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) to Proposed Standard

[ned.freed@mrochek.com]

	Please return the full line with your position.

                    Yes    No-Objection  Discuss *  Abstain  


Ned Freed           [   ]     [   ]       [ X ]      [   ]

[My concern can easily be addressed by an RFC Editor note; no need to delay the
document for it]

The (brief) discussion of the pres: URL in draft-ietf-simple-presence
concerns me. It says:

   A presentity is identified in the most general way through a presence
   URI [3], which is of the form pres:user@domain. These URIs are
   protocol independent. They are resolved to protocol specific URIs,
   such as a SIP or SIPS URI, through domain-specific mapping policies.

This doesn't make it clear that while the mapping policies may vary from
domain to domain, the way those policies are expressed does not. I
suggest changing this to read:

   A presentity is identified in the most general way through a presence
   URI [3], which is of the form pres:user@domain. These URIs are
   protocol independent. They are resolved to protocol specific URIs,
   such as a SIP or SIPS URI, through the mapping algorithm specified in
   [5] and domain-specific mapping policies.

One additional nit: These drafts have reference entries of the form:

   [5] D. H. Crocker and J. Peterson, "Address resolution for instant
   messaging and presence," internet draft, Internet Engineering Task
   Force, Dec. 2002.  Work in progress.

I really don't like this: I want to see the name of the Internet Draft in there
somewhere. Perhaps some folks keep a mapppint of the draft titles to draft
id name in their heads, but I'm not one of them so this omission makes
chasing the references fairly painful.

				Ned