Subject: Re: [AVT] AD review draft-ietf-avt-rtp-ipmr-10

From: "Yury Morzeev" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 17:29:16 +0300

Hi Robert,

Thank you for your review. Let me kindly add some comments.

Regarding 1) - please explain what you mean to do from my side.

Regarding 2) - the theme of licensing has been previously raised and after it we added to the title:
The source codes included in this document are provided under BSD license (http://trustee.ietf.org/docs/IETF-Trust-License-Policy.pdf).
If there is some misunderstanding of your request from my side, please, correct.

Regarding 3)-4) - I have corrected the text in accordance with your recommendation (please, look at http://www.ietf.org/staging/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-ipmr-11.txt).

Let me kindly ask you what will be the next step please.

Regards,
Yury Morzeev
please consider the environment - do you really need to print this email?

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Robert Sparks
Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2010 10:16 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: [AVT] AD review draft-ietf-avt-rtp-ipmr-10

I've reviewed version -10 of this document and have a couple of things  
to discuss before the next step.

1) It is unusual for payload formats to be published as Informational.  
Unless there is a strong argument otherwise,
this should be moved forward as Proposed Standard.

2) I think we'll need to get some advice on the header/boilerplate and  
inclusion of the BSD license text for the code.
I'll work directly with the editors on this.

3) There are some SHOULDs in section 3.3 that I suspect really meant  
to be MUSTs.
      The re requirement that the T bit SHOULD be set to 0 and that a  
received packet
      containing a CR value of 6 SHOULD be discarded. Why aren't those  
MUSTs?
      I suspect its because you are looking forward to some future  
change allowing a
     T value of 1 or for a CR value of 6 to mean something. If so,  
those requirements
      should be MUSTs. Any change to the standard that allows  
different behavior will
      update those requirements.

4) This sentence "Values in the range 0-5 indicate bitrates for the  
core layer, same
      as for packet SHOULD be discarded" fails to parse. 
_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt