Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-09.txt

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Thu, 28 November 2013 07:32 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 570C61AE16E for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:32:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 4.145
X-Spam-Level: ****
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.145 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FRT_STOCK1=3.988, FRT_STOCK2=3.988, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_FRT_STOCK1=0.01, T_FRT_STOCK2=0.01] autolearn=no
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 ClF75RJZ9PCW for <gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:32:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25AF41AE17E for <gen-art@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 23:32:38 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f1c8e000005ceb-07-5296f195c957
Received: from ESESSHC011.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id F2.E2.23787.591F6925; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:32:37 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.53) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.328.9; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:32:36 +0100
Message-ID: <5296F18E.7040003@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:32:30 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
References: <5ADB8FDA-1756-40B0-8CEA-811EB0239C95@vigilsec.com>
In-Reply-To: <5ADB8FDA-1756-40B0-8CEA-811EB0239C95@vigilsec.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupjluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42KZGfG3Vnfqx2lBBvMWSFtcffWZxeLVi5vs DkweS5b8ZPJYdecLawBTFJdNSmpOZllqkb5dAlfG1639zAWXVCrm9S9ib2A8LN3FyMkhIWAi san1HSuELSZx4d56ti5GLg4hgUOMEtPP7mQESQgJLGeU6N4uAGLzCmhLrDi2gLmLkYODRUBV 4v+LDJAwm4CFxM0fjWwgtqhAsMTV3nXMEOWCEidnPmEBsUUE1CX+zr/ADmIzCyhLnJjyA2y8 sICTxL/GK1Cr7CUurF8CVs8p4CAxafotNpBVEgLiEj2NQRCtehJTrrYwQtjyEs1bZzNDtGpL NDR1sE5gFJqFZPMsJC2zkLQsYGRexciem5iZk15uuIkRGKYHt/zW3cF46pzIIUZpDhYlcd4P b52DhATSE0tSs1NTC1KL4otKc1KLDzEycXBKNTBOUvdXdf+3/XIqd1X1zLKei3Xnkjf/i523 ll3AYn/kbNkZVfvN5h80ZshePSdaWCP83w65I9cK9/QXbZq5/8ZNjZyFG4+f+bakemt+yRTm sOJ/a9/8LkzfdjZSRm5F9N4Je2as/rd/ocLzZWsUJVpOr+4vLU2MFVCNZQ1+EPl7xfnzvzQn 9zP3KLEUZyQaajEXFScCAJu5fH8hAgAA
Cc: IETF Gen-ART <gen-art@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART Review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-09.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 07:32:41 -0000

On 2013-11-28 00:08, Russ Housley wrote:
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> 
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
> you may receive.
> 
> Document: draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-09.txt
> Reviewer: Russ Housley
> Review Date: 2013-11-27
> IETF LC End Date: 2013-12-06
> IESG Telechat date: Unknown
> 
> Summary:  The document is almost ready for publication as a
> informational RFC.  I raise minor concerns that should be resolved
> before IESG evaluation.
> 
> Minor Concerns:  
> 
> In section 3.2.1, the document references RFC 6722.  I think it would
> be better to reference the Tao web page.

You mean this page: http://www.ietf.org/tao.html ?

And the argument is that the TAO will be up to date, while the RFC just
is snapshot?

I would be inclined to reference both.

> 
> In section 4.1.1, I would reword the last sentence.  I suggest: "The
> authors also do one last review of the document immediately prior to
> its publication as an RFC to ensure that no errors or formatting
> problems have been introduced during the publication process."

That sounds good, no issues with changing to what has been proposed.

> 
> This document references a bunch of I-Ds.  Since all of the references
> are informative, it would be helpful to know if this document ought to
> proceed to publication or whether it should wait until these I-Ds are
> published as RFCs.
> 
> 

[I-D.ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory]
              Perkins, C. and M. Westerlund, "Securing the RTP Protocol
              Framework: Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media
              Security Solution", draft-ietf-avt-srtp-not-mandatory-14
              (work in progress), October 2013.

   [I-D.ietf-avtcore-clksrc]
              Williams, A., Gross, K., Brandenburg, R., and H. Stokking,
              "RTP Clock Source Signalling", draft-ietf-avtcore-
              clksrc-07 (work in progress), October 2013.

   [I-D.ietf-avtcore-leap-second]
              Gross, K. and R. Brandenburg, "RTP and Leap Seconds",
              draft-ietf-avtcore-leap-second-05 (work in progress),
              October 2013.


   [I-D.ietf-avtcore-rtp-security-options]
              Westerlund, M. and C. Perkins, "Options for Securing RTP
              Sessions", draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-security-options-07
              (work in progress), October 2013.

   [I-D.ietf-avtext-multiple-clock-rates]
              Petit-Huguenin, M. and G. Zorn, "Support for Multiple
              Clock Rates in an RTP Session", draft-ietf-avtext-
              multiple-clock-rates-10 (work in progress), September
              2013.


The ones above are already in the publication process, so these it does
makes sense to wait for. They are also quite important, especially the
security ones.

   [I-D.ietf-payload-rtp-opus]
              Spittka, J., Vos, K., and J. Valin, "RTP Payload Format
              for Opus Speech and Audio Codec", draft-ietf-payload-rtp-
              opus-01 (work in progress), August 2013.

The OPUS RTP Payload format is used as an example. I think it can be
published without this as an RFC ref.

   [I-D.ietf-avtcore-multiplex-guidelines]
              Westerlund, M., Perkins, C., and H. Alvestrand,
              "Guidelines for using the Multiplexing Features of RTP to
              Support Multiple Media Streams", draft-ietf-avtcore-
              multiplex-guidelines-01 (work in progress), July 2013.

This are informational guidance, thus good but not necessary.

   [I-D.ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers]
              Perkins, C. and V. Singh, "Multimedia Congestion Control:
              Circuit Breakers for Unicast RTP Sessions", draft-ietf-
              avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-03 (work in progress), July
              2013.

This is included in the template, and thus likely should be waited for.

Summary: I think it should wait for its references, unless anyone get
stuck. I do have hope that they all will complete during 2014.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------