Subject: [Gen-art] gen-art review of draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-04.txt

From: Scott Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 16:11:10 -0500

I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).  Please
resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may
receive.

Document: draft-ietf-mediactrl-architecture-04.txt
Reviewer: Scott  Brim
Review Date: 2009-01-19
IETF LC End Date: 2009-01-26
IESG Telechat date: (not known)

Summary: This document is ready for publication as an Informational
RFC with one nit.

Details:

It's good.  I have a minor issue.  I note that in the definition of
media server ...

   Media Server (MS): The media server includes the mixer as defined
   in [RFC4353].  The media server plays announcements, it processes
   media streams for functions like Dual Tone Multi-Frequency (DTMF)
   detection and transcoding.  The media server may also record media
   streams for supporting IVR functions like announcing conference
   participants. ...

... you don't include what seems to me to be its most essential
function, to deliver media streams to SIP user agents (via RTP/SRTP).
I just want to be sure that you didn't leave out fundamental functions
because you were figuring out the more complex ones.

swb

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: Scott Brim <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:43:19 -0500

> hi scott,
> my feeling is that sourcing and sinking media streams is implicit in
> all of the overt functions covered by the definition and that the act
> of "only" sourcing or sinking media, divorced from the functions
> listed in the definition, is not really a primary MS function.
> 
> also, the text and diagram in section 3 "architecture overview" clearly
> note that the MS is sourcing and sinking media streams to/from
> SIP UAs so i don't think there is any chance of confusion.
> 
> cheers,
> timm

OK.  

Scott

> 
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Scott Brim <[email-masked]> wrote:
>

---

From: Tim Melanchuk <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 07:37:28 -0800