[AVTCORE] AD Review of draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-vvc-14

["Murray S. Kucherawy" <[e-mail]>]

Hi all,

Comments on this draft before we move it forward.  I bounced around the
document as I went through this, checking references and whatnot, so this
is not in any particular order.

Generally, this seems to be in good shape.  Structurally, the major thing
that needs attention is the IANA stuff.  A pet peeve of mine in documents
these days is abuse of SHOULD, but this seems to have used it properly for
the most part (I raised a couple of them below) so kudos there.

This is an area of ART in which I'm not particularly strong, so it's
possible there are technical issues I've missed.  I'm trusting that the WG
and other reviewers are comfortable with how solid this is in that regard.

As a reminder, I will be around for the rest of this week and then on
vacation from IETF work until May.

-MSK

INTERESTING STUFF

SECTION 1

The first sentence of the first paragraph appears to be incomplete.

SECTION 7.1

This media type registration form is not complete.  Several sections are
missing.  Please use the template found in Section 5.6 of RFC 6838.  Also,
"Required Parameters" should be "N/A", not "None".

I suggest you include the completed template in Section 11.  It can refer
to Section 7.1 for all the details about the optional parameters, etc.

The general format of this section is also confusing.  For instance, it
gradually goes through all of the optional parameters, but then just after
"interop-constraints", which is an optional parameter, it gets into
"sprop-sublayer-id" which is not in the list at the top of the template.  I
can't tell if there should be a section break here, or if the list of
optional parameters is incomplete, or something else.

SECTION 3.2

This section lists "RPS" as an acronym used in this document, but it isn't.

SECTION 4.3.2

When would an implementation legitimately not do what the SHOULD says here?

SECTION 7.2.2.3

I don't understand the SHOULD here.  Can this work if an implementation
doesn't understand all of the media type parameters?  When might one
legitimately continue without that being the case?

APPENDIX A

Please add a note to the RFC Editor to delete this section prior to
publication (which I assume is the intent).

NITS

SECTION 1.1.1

"... the maximum size of coding tree unit ..." -- missing "a" or "the"?

s/signalling/signaling/

SECTION 1.1.2

s/labelled/labeled/

s/labelling/labeling/ (2x)

s/signalling/signaling/ (2x)

s/MPGEG/MPEG/

SECTION 1.1.3

s/signalling/signaling/ (3x)

SECTION 5

"... aggregation packet together one or more NAL units ..." -- missing a
"with"?

SECTION 6

"... RTP sequences number ..." -- s/sequences/sequence/

SECTION 7.1

s/signalling/signaling/

s/signalled/signaled/ (3x)

SECTION 10

s/achieving/achieved/