I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (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 comments you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-fecframe-simple-rs-04
Reviewer: Miguel Garcia <[email protected]>
Review Date: 2012-10-17
IETF LC End Date: 2012-10-22
Summary: The document is ready for publication as a standards track RFC,
but has some Nits that should be addressed.
Major issues: none
Minor issues: none
Nits/editorial comments:
- Section 5.1.1 starts with this sentence:
The FEC Framework Configuration Information (or FFCI) includes
information that MUST be communicated between the sender and
receiver(s).
This is not a normative "MUST" that you are specifying. You are merely
describing how another specification has a normative MUST, but it is not
of this document. Therefore, this "MUST" should be replaced by a "need"
or perhaps a "must".
- Section 5.1.1.1 reads:
When SDP is used to communicate the FFCI, this FEC Encoding ID is
carried in the 'encoding-id' parameter.
Two points here:
a) I am missing a normative MUST, such as "this FEC Encoding ID MUST be
carried..."
b) I guess it would not be such a bad idea to complete the sentence with
the attribute name in SDP and normative reference that defines the
attribute and the parameter.
Proposal:
When SDP is used to communicate the FFCI, this FEC Encoding ID MUST be
carried in the 'encoding-id' parameter of the 'fec-repair-flow'
attribute specified in RFC 6364 [RFC6364].
- Similarly in Section 5.1.1.2:
If you agree with this changes, you should do similar changes to Section
5.1.1.2, the text beginning with "When SDP is used..." Notice also that
the example following this text in Section 5.1.1.2 is misleading because
it does not contain a single SDP line, which is generally considered the
atomic representation element in examples, but just a fraction of it. I
suggest to extend the example to the full a=fec-repair-flow line.
- Section 8, IANA. Isn't the name of the registry "Reliable Multicast
Transport (RMT) FEC Encoding IDs and FEC Instance IDs"? Or am I looking
at the wrong registry? I think that the "FEC Framework (FECFRAME) FEC
Encoding IDs is one of the registries included under that umbrella of RMT
FEC Encoding IDs. As a reader, I would like to be able to find the right
registry without doubt.
/Miguel
--
Miguel A. Garcia
+34-91-339-3608
Ericsson Spain
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
