Re: [AVTCORE] Some changes to rfc3984bis, SVC, and RCDO payload drafts

Hi Glen,
The technical change is more in H.264/AVC specification. In the payload
specifications (3984bis/ RCDO and SVC) the change is to specify the
conversion between the old and new parameter and to explain the change in
H.264.
It can be looked as a technical and I will leave it to the AD to help here.

As for the quality of the change it was done by YK with the help of Steve
Botzko (H.241 editor) and Gary Sullivan the Rapportuer of Q6 SG16 that does
the video codec in a f2f meeting. It was also reviewed by me and by some
other experts on video coding and I feel good about the solution,

This change involves also an update to H.241 that has the same issue and the
objective is to approve the H.241 change this week at the ongoing ITU Study
Group 16 meeting. The solution for the IETF draft and ITU draft should be
the same to address interoperability.

Thanks
Roni Even
As individual.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: avt-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:avt-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Glen Zorn
> Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2011 11:17 AM
> To: Ye-Kui Wang
> Cc: avt@ietf.org; payload@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] Some changes to rfc3984bis, SVC, and RCDO
> payload drafts
> 
> On 3/20/2011 3:20 PM, Ye-Kui Wang wrote:
> > Folks,
> >
> >
> >
> > The three H.264/AVC related payload formats, namely,
> > draft-ietf-avt-rtp-rfc3984bis-12, draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-27, and
> > draft-ietf-avt-rtp-h264-rcdo-08, are all at the AUTH48 stage.
> >
> >
> >
> > The RFC-Editor has found the following problem: In
> > draft-ietf-avt-rtp-rfc3984bis-12, the definition of the max-dpb media
> > parameter refers to the MaxDPB that was defined the first version of
> the
> > H.264/AVC spec, but not any more in the latest version (the 2010
> > version). The parameter in the latest H.264/AVC version corresponding
> to
> > MaxDPB is MaxDpbMbs, and the unit of the new parameter (i.e.,
> > macroblocks) is different from the original one (i.e. 1024 bytes).
> 
> ...
> 
> > Since the drafts are at the AUTH48 stage, please provide comments by
> > Monday, March 21, if any. Many thanks!
> 
> Just my opinion but these seem like technical changes that can't really
> be dealt with in AUTH48.
> 
> ...
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> avt@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt