Subject: [AVT] Errata classification for RFC5760

From: Peter Musgrave <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 11:53:07 -0400

Hi Rob,

Here are my suggestions for the uncategorized errata on RFC5760:

2111 (technical) Hold for Doc Update
(since SR and RR are implicitly RTCP I do not think any confusion will result)

2112 (editorial) Hold for doc update

2113 (technical) Hold for Doc Update
(partial term use is clear enough and unlikely to cause confusion)

2114 (technical/editorial) Approved
This is a compound errata - it contains a technical and editorial comment.

technical - BNF for rtcp-unicast has a single ]
Given the lack of SDP examples this errata should be approved.
editorial - some or/of and plurality.

2115 (technical) Hold for doc update
errata refers to p63. Text is actually on p62.
Error is mitigated by the fact that further on in the example the
correct interpretation is used.

2116 (technical) Hold for doc update
Terms in the B.4 example should match the definition of SRBT in the doc body

2117 (technical) Hold for doc update
Terms in the B.4 example should match the definition of SRBT in the doc body

Regards,

Peter Musgrave