[AVT] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-vc1-01

Magnus and Colin,

Thanks for taking the time to review draft-ietf-avt-rtp-vc1-01.  I think
I can address all of your comments in the next version (-02).

As for adding additional SDP parameters to support the SIP
"offer/answer" feature, I wonder if it is a requirement these days that
all new RTP payload formats should come with built-in support for this
functionality?  Or is this something that could be defined at a later
date, by the appropriate SIP working group?

If we were to omit "offer/answer" from this spec, does it need to
mention that IANA maintains a registry of MIME/SDP parameters?  Colin's
comment seemed to suggest that it is necessary to mention this.  The
spec already mentions that IANA should register "video/vc1".  Doesn't
that imply that IANA will also register any additional MIME parameters
that the IETF may want to define in the future?

As for the numbering of the headings and the title headings being split
into separate lines, I don't know why that happened. The document that I
e-mailed to internet-drafts@ietf.org does not have that problem.  Would
they have edited the document for some reason?

Thanks,

Anders 

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt