Re: [avtext] WGLC for draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-01

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Sat, 18 April 2015 10:18 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
X-Original-To: avtext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: avtext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 789BC1A1BC8 for <avtext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 03:18:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Eggp2HdyCqg5 for <avtext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 03:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from balrog.mythic-beasts.com (balrog.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:82:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BF9EF1A1BC6 for <avtext@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 03:18:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [81.187.2.149] (port=33285 helo=[192.168.0.18]) by balrog.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <csp@csperkins.org>) id 1YjPp7-0004uo-7Y; Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:18:06 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <BBE9739C2C302046BD34B42713A1E2A22E533189@ESESSMB105.ericsson.se>
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:17:54 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A314D7E7-FF64-4DD1-9305-50B667FD52AA@csperkins.org>
References: <D02DD414-BF7A-4726-A270-CBD06CEB1D25@vidyo.com> <BBE9739C2C302046BD34B42713A1E2A22E533189@ESESSMB105.ericsson.se>
To: Bo Burman <bo.burman@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: -28
X-Mythic-Debug: Threshold = On =
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/avtext/ODJrkgqp2tMpG1lyE8VHGt7kEiQ>
Cc: "avtext@ietf.org" <avtext@ietf.org>, "draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [avtext] WGLC for draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-01
X-BeenThere: avtext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Extensions working group discussion list <avtext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/avtext>, <mailto:avtext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/avtext/>
List-Post: <mailto:avtext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:avtext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avtext>, <mailto:avtext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 18 Apr 2015 10:18:10 -0000

I've also reviewed this. I had similar comments to Bo around use of the grouping framework, signalling what is the main and which is the substitutive stream, and behaviour when there are more than two streams in the splicing group.

I also noticed that Section 3.2, last paragraph, says "MAY NOT", which is not an RFC 2119 keyword. Is this intended to be MUST NOT, SHOULD NOT, or something else entirely?

Colin



On 17 Apr 2015, at 14:33, Bo Burman <bo.burman@ericsson.com> wrote:

> I have reviewed this draft, and I think that it addresses all of my previous concerns.
> 
> I have the following, additional comments to section 6:
> 
> 1) Is the intent that the main RTP stream in the SPLICE group is always the one with the splicing-interval extmap attribute, and the substitutive RTP is the other one? If so, I think being explicit about that could be helpful. You have marked that with an i= line in the example, but do not require it formally, and I also think you cannot require a parser to rely on i= information to choose which is which.
> 
> 2) I think it may be helpful to say that can there MUST NOT be more than two m-lines in a single SPLICE group. If there would be more, you obviously cannot know which RTP m-line to splice in at the splice point.
> 
> 3) I think it may be helpful to say that a single m-line MUST NOT be part of more than a single SPLICE group.
> 
> 4) s/FID/SPLICE/
> 
> 5) In 6.3, SDP offer, should the substitutive video be sendonly, or is it intentionally sendrecv? It is sendrecv also in the SDP answer, so if it is intentional, it is formally OK between offer and answer.
> 
> 6) In 6.3, SDP answer, the substitutive audio is marked as sendonly, but should be recvonly to match the offer.
> 
> 7) Editorial nits:
> Near the end of section 2: s/sllowing/allowing/
> Near beginning of section 6: s/This document extended/ This document extends/
> 
> Cheers,
> Bo
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: avtext [mailto:avtext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Lennox
>> Sent: den 31 mars 2015 16:27
>> To: avtext@ietf.org
>> Cc: avtext-chairs@tools.ietf.org; draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification@tools.ietf.org
>> Subject: [avtext] WGLC for draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-01
>> 
>> This is to announce a 3 week Working Group Last Call for
>> 
>> 	draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-01
>> 
>> as proposed standard.
>> 
>> Please review and provide any comments you may have on the document by Tuesday, April 21, 2015. Comments should
>> be sent to the document authors and the AVTEXT WG list. If you review the document but do not have any comments,
>> please send a note to that effect as well.
>> 
>> Please also forward this WGLC call to any other interested parties who may be able to review the draft, asking them to
>> also direct their comments to the authors and the list as above.
>> 
>> Thank you!
>> 
>>         Jonathan (AVTEXT co-chair)
>> 
>> 
>> Draft information:
>> 
>>  This draft is a work item of the Audio/Video Transport Extensions Working Group of the IETF.
>> 
>>       Title           : RTP/RTCP extension for RTP Splicing Notification
>>       Authors         : Jinwei Xia
>>                         Roni Even
>>                         Rachel Huang
>>                         Lingli Deng
>> 	Filename        : draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-01.txt
>> 	Pages           : 17
>> 	Date            : 2014-12-10
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>  Content splicing is a process that replaces the content of a main
>>  multimedia stream with other multimedia content, and delivers the
>>  substitutive multimedia content to the receivers for a period of
>>  time. The splicer is designed to handle RTP splicing and needs to
>>  know when to start and end the splicing.
>> 
>>  This memo defines two RTP/RTCP extensions to indicate the splicing
>>  related information to the splicer: an RTP header extension that
>>  conveys the information in-band and an RTCP packet that conveys the
>>  information out-of-band.
>> 
>> 
>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification/
>> 
>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-01
>> 
>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-01
>> 
>> 
>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are
>> available at tools.ietf.org.
>> 
>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> avtext mailing list
>> avtext@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avtext
> 
> _______________________________________________
> avtext mailing list
> avtext@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avtext



-- 
Colin Perkins
https://csperkins.org/