Fixed. Thanks, Jonathan R.
Guilherme Balena Versiani wrote:
Just an addendum (below):
Section 7.1.1.1., 1st paragraph on page 40: "(...) This priority value will be computed identically to how the priority for the local candidate of the pair was computed, except that the type preference is set to the value for peer derived candidate types." Just a little conformance issue: "(...) for peer derived candidate types" would be "(...) for peer reflexive candidate types". Regards, Guilherme Balena Versiani. _______________________________________________ mmusic mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
-- Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. 600 Lanidex Plaza Cisco Fellow Parsippany, NJ 07054-2711 Cisco Systems [EMAIL PROTECTED] FAX: (973) 952-5050 http://www.jdrosen.net PHONE: (973) 952-5000 http://www.cisco.com _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
