Hi Elwyn, Please see inline for a comment on your suggestion and thank you for the nits. The updated proposal and the nits correction (some modified) have been written up as PR:
https://github.com/gloinul/draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry/pull/2 From: Elwyn Davies via Datatracker <nore...@ietf.org> Date: Thursday, 19 September 2024 at 23:21 To: gen-art@ietf.org <gen-art@ietf.org> Cc: a...@ietf.org <a...@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry....@ietf.org <draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry....@ietf.org> Subject: Genart early review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-payload-registry-02 Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review result: Ready with Nits Early review requested from the General Area Review team ======================================================== Summary: The document covers the situation (cock up!) appropriately. It is essentially ready. I have suggested that some additional modification of the note in the IANA registry being shut down would be helpful. There are also half a dozen editorial nits. Minor Suggestion The IANA Registry affected by this document (RTP Payload Format Media Types) references RFC 4855 and claims that it contains registration procedures and a registration template. This document correctly asserts that this is untrue. Perhaps this document should additionally ask IANA to modify the reference to [RFC4855], [RFC-TBD1] and replace the second para of the note as follows: OLD: Registration procedures and a registration template can be found in [RFC4855]. NEW: It was previously stated that registration procedures and a registration template can be found in [RFC4855]. This is not actually the case and [RFC4855] has been updated by [RFC-TBD1]. END MW: I think your suggestion is a good one. However, your new text needs to be corrected as this document does not update RFC 4855, only RFC 8088. I would suggest that we rather use this as a new sentence: NEW: It was previously stated that registration procedures and a registration template can be found in [RFC4855]. This is not actually the case as discussed by [RFC-TBD1]. This would be followed by the the text in this document starting "This registry has been closed..." Editorial Nits Abstract, s1: Specifications not being sentient beings (probably).... s/to register themselves/ to specify registration of the format/ Abstract: s/"RTP Payload Formats Media Types"./"RTP Payload Formats Media Types" created by RFC 8088./ (which will suppress IDNITS complaints about not seeing RFC 8988 in the abstract/) s1, para 1: s/RTP payload formats/RTP payload formats created according to [RFC8088]/ s1, para 2: s/various signalling usage/its various signalling usages/ s3, para 1: s/mandates/mandates in its IANA Considerations (Section 7.4)/ s4, para 2 (just after Table 1): s/add the following to the note to the registry:/add the following note to the registry:/ MW: Clarified that I want to add the note to the existing registry. /Magnus
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list -- gen-art@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to gen-art-le...@ietf.org