Re: [AVTCORE] Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5285-bis-12: (with COMMENT)

[Roni Even <[e-mail]>]

Hi Adam,
Inline
Roni

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Roach [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: יום ד 21 יוני 2017 02:16
> To: The IESG
> Cc: [e-mail]; Magnus Westerlund; avtcore-
> [e-mail]; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
> Subject: Adam Roach's Yes on draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5285-bis-12: (with
> COMMENT)
> 
> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5285-bis-12: Yes
> 
> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email
> addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory
> paragraph, however.)
> 
> 
> Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> 
> 
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtcore-rfc5285-bis/
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The use of the term "local" in this document is implicit and therefore
> confusing. Section 5 refers to "local identifier (ID)", while section 7 refers to
> "Local identifiers". Neither indicates what the identifiers are local to, and
> some implementors have chosen to interpret this as meaning "local to the
> sender machine." See, for example,
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1361206
> 
> I believe the intention here is for "local" to mean "local to this session."
> This meaning should be made explicit. And, for avoidance of doubt, the
> document should clarify that the negotiated identifiers use the same
> numeric value in both directions. This is implied by much of the text, but it
> never stated outright. Because so many other session attributes (e.g.,
> payload types) can be negotiated to be different in each direction, many
> implementors are likely to assume the same applies here. As the above bug
> demonstrates, this leads to real interop issues in the field.

[Roni Even] I also think you are right and should be clarified as "local to RTP session" 
I will also verify this on the AVT list and with my co-authors

> 
> Nits:
> 
>    element (no alignment is needed), and parsing stops at the earlier of
>    the end of the entire header extension, or in one-byte headers only
>    case, on encountering an identifier with the reserved value of 15.
> 
> Put quotation marks around "one byte headers only".
[Roni Even] OK
> ____
> 
>    Each extension element MUST starts with a byte containing an ID and a
>    length:
> 
> s/starts/start/
[Roni Even] OK
> ____
> 
> The attribute definition in section 6 says "Value:" instead of "Value: none."
> -- Fix or refer to the IANA section instead.
[Roni Even] OK, will change n section 6 to "Value:none"

>