Re: [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-beam-10.txt
Black_David@emc.com Thu, 19 June 2008 19:15 UTC
Return-Path: <avt-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: avt-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-avt-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F40828C131; Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:15:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avt@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43EA23A6810; Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:53:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k+bxmvMyRmjV; Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:53:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (mexforward.lss.emc.com [128.222.32.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20DA93A6767; Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:53:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI01.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.54]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id m5JErlpi029625 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:53:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (uraeus.lss.emc.com [10.254.144.14]) by hop04-l1d11-si01.isus.emc.com (Tablus Interceptor); Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:53:43 -0400
Received: from corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com (corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com [10.254.64.53]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.2.5/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id m5JErK2Q022794; Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:53:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Black_David@emc.com
Received: from CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com ([128.221.62.12]) by corpussmtp3.corp.emc.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:53:36 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 10:53:35 -0400
Message-ID: <8CC6CEAB44F131478D3A7B429ECACD91016F6444@CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com>
In-Reply-To: <4859E4D3.6060808@sm.sony.co.jp>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-beam-10.txt
Thread-Index: AcjRx8oWDaavGaDgTAqUOFR12vk4DAAU7/JQ
References: <8CC6CEAB44F131478D3A7B429ECACD91016F6414@CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com> <4859E4D3.6060808@sm.sony.co.jp>
To: satosi-f@sm.sony.co.jp
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Jun 2008 14:53:36.0347 (UTC) FILETIME=[40858AB0:01C8D21C]
X-Tablus-Inspected: yes
X-Tablus-Classifications: public
X-Tablus-Action: allow
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:15:06 -0700
Cc: fluffy@cisco.com, tom.taylor@rogers.com, ietf@ietf.org, gen-art@ietf.org, roni.even@polycom.co.il, avt@ietf.org, Black_David@emc.com, itakura@sm.sony.co.jp, andrew@ualberta.net, csp@csperkins.org
Subject: Re: [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-beam-10.txt
X-BeenThere: avt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Working Group <avt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt>, <mailto:avt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/private/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>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: avt-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: avt-bounces@ietf.org
Futemma-san, > I have sent the mail about the priority mapping of > progression based ordering. > So, I reply to the other comments on the mail. > > Black_David@emc.com wrote: > > [2] The review of the -09 version stated "Section 4.1 contains this > > problematic text: > > > > An initial value of mh_id MUST be selected randomly between 1 and 7 > > for security reasons." > > > > This has been partially addressed. While section 2.1 now requires that > > the initial value of mh_id always be zero, the above "problematic text" > > remains, and still needs to be removed from Section 4.1. > > I will change the sentence in Section 2.1. Please *remove* the quoted sentence from Section 4.1. There is essentially no security value in a random number that is limited to 7 possible values. If that sentence is going to remain in Section 4.1, the words "for security purposes" should be removed. > > In addition, Security Considerations paragraph on mh_id concludes with > > a rather cryptic statement that "Care should be taken to prevent > > implementation bugs with potential security consequences." Either > > more specific guidance should be given, or the entire paragraph should > > be removed, as mh_id does not appear to have any security value. > > Pasi suggested the paragraph which we agree to. > > So how about replacing the last sentence with: > > "Even if the incorrect main header is passed, the standard > JPEG 2000 decoder could detect inconsistency of the codestream > and process it properly. It is recommended to clear the saved > mh_id if the decoder detect such an inconsistency." Ok. > > In addition, there is a new open issue: > > > > [3] Section 7 does not appear to instruct IANA on what is to be done. > > It appears that IANA should add the new parameters in section 5 to > > the existing registration of a media type, but neither section 5 > > nor section 7 tells IANA what do to or which media type registration > > is to be modified. > > All right, > > Here is the modification plan. > > In Section 5: > > The document extends the associated media type "video/jpeg2000" > from RFC XXXY [1]. Here are additional optional parameters. Ok. > > Nits: > > > > Reference [1] has still not been corrected. The Gen-ART review of > > the -09 version stated: > > > > Reference [1] should reference the Internet Draft by name. > > [1] Futemma, "RTP Payload Format for JPEG 2000 Video Streams", > > RFC XXXY, April 2007. > > I believe this is draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-18.txt. That should > > be in the reference instead of RFC XXXY. Then add an RFC Editor > > note asking the RFC Editor to replace all instances of RFC XXXY > > with the RFC number assigned when reference [1] is published as an > > RFC. > > > > The version of this draft has now advanced to -19. > > I agree. Ok. Thanks, --David ---------------------------------------------------- David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA 01748 +1 (508) 293-7953 FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786 black_david@emc.com Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754 ---------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Audio/Video Transport Working Group avt@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
- [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg20… Black_David
- Re: [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jp… Satoshi Futemma
- Re: [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jp… Black_David
- Re: [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jp… Satoshi Futemma
- Re: [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jp… Black_David