Re: [AVTCORE] Erratum 4097 on RFC 2435

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Mon, 26 January 2015 09:50 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23FF71A8856; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:50:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.201
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.201 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vn1R6A7QKZTA; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:50:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sesbmg23.ericsson.net (sesbmg23.ericsson.net [193.180.251.37]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E0EF1A8880; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 01:50:03 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb25-f791c6d00000617b-0d-54c60dc96ba7
Received: from ESESSHC021.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg23.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id F9.9B.24955.9CD06C45; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:50:01 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.83) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.195.1; Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:50:00 +0100
Message-ID: <54C60DC5.4090102@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 10:49:57 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Dale R. Worley" <worley@ariadne.com>
References: <87vbkjd7yd.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
In-Reply-To: <87vbkjd7yd.fsf@hobgoblin.ariadne.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFtrMLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje5J3mMhBtP3iFu87FnJbnH8RBOz xdTlj1ksXp4oc2DxmLz/K7PHzll32T2WLPnJFMAcxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJXRsqKTpaBFqGLq sidsDYzL+LoYOTkkBEwkzh47xQZhi0lcuLceyObiEBI4wiix42wDE4SznFFi/bFLTCBVvALa En9OPmQHsVkEVCU+rbvECGKzCVhI3PzRCDZJVCBYYvHzp6wQ9YISJ2c+Yeli5OAQEdCU6FiQ AxJmFnCU+PejD2yksIC+RP/cO8wgtpCAkcSElttgYzgFjCX29zaxQtQbSBxZNAfKlpdo3job ql5boqGpg3UCo+AsJNtmIWmZhaRlASPzKkbR4tTipNx0I2O91KLM5OLi/Dy9vNSSTYzAUD64 5bfqDsbLbxwPMQpwMCrx8G5cezREiDWxrLgy9xCjNAeLkjivnfGhECGB9MSS1OzU1ILUovii 0pzU4kOMTBycUg2MUZ3H/AqqXrmXTHB1Cf0/VT/o3o/vFnu/e8n8Vv6vtlp4Qu1KhiS+6JS/ 2vO6vrft+WIbtFrqw/LIdAPV9S2Rdqtatl5d2NClOSlI/sKRZpWIa765Va/5Yx+Jzc14Wuck VB+braJjrmoZ2nOoq/fKw71bD236lBS99+Frxd3uVdKfjga9nbhMiaU4I9FQi7moOBEAiMJY I0YCAAA=
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avt/HEjihtU9CPeY1AyjEPtRHUq3sTk>
Cc: juliusfriedman@gmail.com, avt@ietf.org, mmusic@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] Erratum 4097 on RFC 2435
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/avt/>
List-Post: <mailto:avt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 09:50:06 -0000

Hi,

I don't see any change to the actual text. The note part appears to be
suggestion for a non-backwards compatible change. As said before,
technical modifications to specifications are not done using the Errata
system. Instead one will have to write a new specification (Internet
Draft) that is taken through the WG and IESG approval.

As this is non-backwards compatible change, I think the most likely
outcome would be to use a new RTP payload identifier for this new format.

Please note that the correct WG for RTP Payload specification work is
the PAYLOAD WG.

My suggestion is that this errata is rejected.

Cheers

Magnus


On 2015-01-06 20:28, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> I've looked at this erratum
> (http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?eid=4097) and I don't think
> I understand it.
> 
> It contains a section titled "Section 3.1.5 says" and a section titled
> "It should say", but the bodies of the two sections are exactly the
> same.  (I used a text editor to compare them.)  So what change is
> described by the erratum?
> 
> There is a section titled "Notes" which says:
> 
>     Use a divisor of 256 to determine the height, where 8 / 256 = 32.
> 
>     Ensure FragmentOffset does not exceed 2^24, if it does then use 2^24
>     - value)
> 
> The first line does not seem to describe the computation described in
> the RFC text, and the equation in that line is incorrect.  (Was it
> supposed to be 256 / 8 = 32?)
> 
> The second line seems to be entirely unrelated to the rest of the
> erratum.  Perhaps it belongs in another erratum?  It also contains an
> unmatched ")".
> 
> Dale
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
> 


-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------