Re: [AVT] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-avt-rtp-vorbis-02.txt

Luca, all,

On 9 Apr 2007, at 20:50, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Audio/Video Transport Working  
> Group of the IETF.
>
> 	Title		: RTP Payload Format for Vorbis Encoded Audio
> 	Author(s)	: L. Barbato
> 	Filename	: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-vorbis-02.txt
> 	Pages		: 25
> 	Date		: 2007-4-9
> 	
> This document describes an RTP payload format for transporting Vorbis
>    encoded audio.  It details the RTP encapsulation mechanism for raw
>    Vorbis data and details the delivery mechanisms for the decoder
>    probability model, referred to as a codebook and other setup
>    information.
>
>    Also included within this memo are media type registrations, and  
> the
>    details necessary for the use of Vorbis with the Session  
> Description
>    Protocol (SDP).
>
> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-vorbis-02.txt

Thanks for updating this draft. I think this version is in pretty  
good shape, although there are a number of minor issues that should  
be resolved before it can be published as an RFC.

First of all, there are a number of 'nits' found by the automated  
checker: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/avt/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-vorbis/draft- 
ietf-avt-rtp-vorbis-02.nits.txt

The media type registrations use an old MIME registration template  
(or a variation on it), and should be updated to match the new  
template. Please follow the instructions in, and reference, RFC 4855,  
and ensure the change controller is listed as "IETF AVT Working Group  
delegated from the IESG", rather than just the working group.

Both media type registrations should be included in the IANA  
Considerations section (or, at least, referenced from it).

For the "delivery-method" media type parameter, is the  
"specific_name" part of the out_band method needed, or can it be  
inferred from the configuration URI? It would ease registration if it  
can be inferred.

The offer/answer considerations section should specify if the  
parameters are declarative or negotiated. Section 3.3.2 of draft-ietf- 
avt-rtp-howto-01.txt has some guidance on this.

These are all relatively minor issues, which should be possible to  
fix relatively quickly.

Cheers,
-- 
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/

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