[AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-avt-rapid-rtp-sync
Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Wed, 12 May 2010 22:12 UTC
Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
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 25E8F3A688F for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 May 2010 15:12:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.366
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.366 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.234, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
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 Nmbzm9tW-k24 for <avt@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 12 May 2010 15:12:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFF073A682E for <avt@ietf.org>; Wed, 12 May 2010 15:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.3.177] (vicuna-alt.estacado.net [75.53.54.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o4CMBvve037541 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 12 May 2010 17:11:58 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 17:11:57 -0500
Message-Id: <1B84BF8B-6DC9-498A-88B9-A471DF108FCC@nostrum.com>
To: avt@ietf.org
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 75.53.54.121 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: draft-ietf-avt-rapid-rtp-sync@tools.ietf.org
Subject: [AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-avt-rapid-rtp-sync
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: <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: Wed, 12 May 2010 22:12:11 -0000
Summary: This is ready for IETF LC with nits to be addressed along with other LC comments Some questions/nits: 1) In the second paragraph of 2.1.1, does "keys should have been negotiated" mean "it is expected that keys have already been negotiated" or is it trying to state a requirement? 2) It might be useful to call out the message in the Note: near the end of section 3.3 again in the security considerations section. 3) Section 4.3 claims to be talking about Figure 3, but it's really talking about an unlabeled figure that should probably be Figure 7. 4) Thomas - would you please check the email addresses you've provided in the IANA considerations section and make sure you intended to use two different ones?
- [AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-avt-rapid-rtp-sync Robert Sparks
- Re: [AVT] AD review: draft-ietf-avt-rapid-rtp-sync Colin Perkins