Thanks for the review. We will fix the nits at first suitable time. See inline for some comments.
Cheers Magnus Vijay K. Gurbani skrev: > 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 wait for direction from your document shepherd > or AD before posting a new version of the draft. > > Document: draft-ietf-avt-avpf-ccm-09.txt > Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani > Review Date: 18 Oct 2007 > IESG Telechat date: 22 Oct 2007 > > Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed > Standard. > > Some nits follow: > > * In S1, it is mentioned that "This makes the use of more > traditional control protocol means, such as Session Initiation > Protocol (SIP) re-INVITEs [RFC3261], undesirable when used for > the same purpose." > > I am curious: I don't believe that SIP re-INVs are used to affect > the sort of codec control messages being discussed in this draft. > I believe that you are pointing out that folks should not use > other means -- like SIP re-INVs -- for this purpose in the > *future.* If so, I would suggest the following change: > s/undesirable when used/undesirable if used/ Yes, and actually we probably should rephrase this to correctly cover SIP INFO and the usage like http://tools.ietf.org/wg/mmusic/draft-levin-mmusic-xml-media-control-11.txt > > * S3.2: s/There are multiple reasons/There are two reasons/ > > * S3.5.4: There appears to be some presentation error (or maybe it > is an error in the underlying XML) on line three and four of that > section. Well, it is an artifact from using Word to generate the document. > > * S3.5.4.2: You may want to consider breaking into two lines the > equations labeled (1) and (2) at the top of page 25. The reason > is that as the labels appear now, they are hidden. Thus, when you > refer to equations (1) and (2) later, it is hard to visually see > where these equations are. I had to go back and use the browser's > find command to help me locate them. > > So, if re-arranged, these equations will look like: > > OLD: > Max_net media_BR_A = TMMBR_max total BR_A - PR * TMMBR_OH_A * 8 ... > (1) > Max_net media_BR_B = TMMBR_max total BR_B - PR * TMMBR_OH_B * 8 ... > (2) > > NEW: > Max_net media_BR_A = > TMMBR_max total BR_A - PR * TMMBR_OH_A * 8 ... (1) > Max_net media_BR_B = > TMMBR_max total BR_B - PR * TMMBR_OH_B * 8 ... (2) > Yes, probably a better way to do it. > * S4.2.1.2, top of page 39: There appears to be some > presentation error (or maybe it is an error in the underlying > XML) on the first two lines of the page, and this is repeated > in the second paragraph of the page. More issues with using Word to generate draft. > > * S4.2.2.2: s/.Note: if any media/Note: if any media > > * S4.3.3.5: Is a sub-section warranted at all if there aren't > any remarks? > Well, we are trying to keep with the format used in AVPF. I think we can spend these 4 lines on showing that we actually have thought about this section, and it isn't erroneously missing. -- Magnus Westerlund IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM/M ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ericsson AB | Phone +46 8 4048287 Torshamsgatan 23 | Fax +46 8 7575550 S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
