Subject: [sipcore] Alexey Melnikov's No Objection on draft-ietf-sipcore-content-id-07: (with COMMENT)

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 02:47:14 -0700

Alexey Melnikov has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sipcore-content-id-07: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sipcore-content-id/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I've checked whether this is consistent with email use and it seems to be.

Note that RFC 2392 says:

   The Content-ID of a MIME body part is required to be globally unique.

and this document only requires it to be unique within a message.

I don't think the difference in restrictions makes any real world difference,
because I don't think applications enforce uniqueness of Content-IDs between
different messages.

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 6 Jul 2017 10:16:54 +0000

Hi Alexey,

Initially the draft a dated the value to be globally unique.

But, based on the assumption that the value is only used within the scope of a given message, we decided to only mandate uniqueness within a given message.

Regards,

Christer

Sent from my iPhone

> On 6 Jul 2017, at 12.47, Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]> wrote:
>