Subject: [Gen-art] review of draft-ietf-avt-rapid-acquisition-for-rtp-15.txt

From: Francis Dupont <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 17:40:50 +0200

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-avt-rapid-acquisition-for-rtp-15.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 20100925
IETF LC End Date: 20100928
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Ready

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits/editorial comments:
 - Abstract page 1: if RTP is a well known abbrev RTCP is not, but
  IMHO if someone reaches it (s)he should already know it...

 - 1 page 4 (first line and others): The receivers -> Receivers ??

 - 1 page 4: I am not convinced 'all of the Reference Information' is
  really correct English ??

 - 3 page 8: the CNAME abbrev must be introduced

 - 6.2 3 page 20: RTP-RX -> RTP_Rx ?

 - 7 page 28: figure 4 has 'SSRC of media source' but the text has
  'SSRC of media sender', this is very confusing!

 - 9 page 41: NAPT abbrev must be introduced (BTW NAT is well known)

 - 9 page 41: why only UDP is considered? DCCP is supposed to be a
  good transport for RTP even in presence of NAT

 - 9 page 41: BTW the PCP WG should add another port forwarding
  config way (but it was created far after the document)

 - 14.1 page 53: some normative references seem to be more informative,
  for instance RFC5226 / BCP26

A+

[email-masked]