Thank you very much for the review!

Authors, have you noted the comments & are taking action (if necessary)?

Jari

On 11 Dec 2015, at 21:14, Meral Shirazipour <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review 
> Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the 
> IETF Chair. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD 
> before posting a new version of the draft.
> 
> For more information, please see the FAQ at 
> http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq .
> 
> Document:  draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-media-rtp-session-12
> Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
> Review Date: 2015-12-11
> IETF LC End Date:  2015-12-09 (sorry for missed LC review-mistakenly reviewed 
> some other draft)
> IESG Telechat date: 2015-12-17
> 
> 
> Summary:
> This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have some 
> comments.
> 
> Major issues:
> 
> 
> Minor issues:
> 
> 
> Nits/editorial comments:
> -[Page 4], "Equal treatment of media" section.
> While reading this paragraph the question comes to mind of if all media flows 
> get 'best effort' only or if all media flows could get e.g. 'Gold treatment', 
> or something in between...
> It would be clearer to add a sentence to say how the treatment (QoS) is 
> specified and applied to all flows.
> 
> -[Page 7], "This specifications purpose"----->"This specification's purpose"
> 
> -[Page 8], "It is important to note that the RTP payload type is never used 
> to distinguish media streams."
> It would be clearer to add this would be explained below. "As expalined 
> below, ..."
> 
> -[Page 9], "form a independent"--->"form an independent"
> 
> -[Page 11], "that FEC stream use"---->"that FEC stream uses"
> 
> -[Page 11,
> "(e.g., if an original RTP
>    session contains audio and video flows, for the associated FEC RTP
>    session where to use the "audio/ulpfec" and "video/ulpfec" payload
>    formats)
> "
> 
> This sentence may need revision, word "where" to be revised.
> 
> -[Page 11], "with a associated generic"---->"with an associated generic"
> 
> -[Page 11], ULP (uneven level protection) to spell out.
> 
> -[Page 12], "this requires each media type use" -----> "this requires each 
> media type to use"
> 
> -[Page 14], some references are expired. Should they remain cited?
> [I-D.ietf-avtcore-multiplex-guidelines],  [I-D.lennox-payload-ulp-ssrc-mux]
> 
> 
> Best Regards,
> Meral
> ---
> Meral Shirazipour
> Ericsson
> Research
> www.ericsson.com
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to