Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-avtcore-ecn-for-rtp-07.txt

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 11:00:12 +0200

On 2012-04-01 01:53, Suresh Krishnan wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
> draft-ietf-avtcore-ecn-for-rtp-07.txt
> 
> For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
> <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.
> 
> Summary: This draft is ready for publication as Proposed Standard, but I
> have a minor concern that you may like to address.
> 
> Minor
> =====
> 
> * The document uses some addresses in the RFC1918 range as example
> addresses. It would be better to use addresses explicitly reserved for
> documentation (The document does indeed use these addresses as well).
> Specifically I would recommend replacing the RFC1918 address 10.0.1.4
> with an address in the 203.0.113.0/24 range from RFC5735.
> 

Thanks for the review.

I am very well aware of that I am using an none documentation range. The
point of the example is that it is an ICE and ECN SDP signalling
example. When using ICE (RFC5245) it is likely that an end-point will
have an private range address, either in the 10.0.0.0/8 or
192.168.0.0/16 address in their candidate lists. Thus to keep the
example correct considering that the SDP represents a client attached to
a NATed network and have multiple candidates I do need to use a private
range address in this example or it would not make sense.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:18:49 -0400

Hi Magnus,

> range address in this example or it would not make sense.

That makes sense. Too bad there is no documentation addresses set aside
for denoting private space.

Cheers
Suresh