[Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml-03

Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 11 October 2019 17:40 UTC

Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietf.org
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA21212004E; Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:40:14 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Russ Housley via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: gen-art@ietf.org
Cc: ietf@ietf.org, avt@ietf.org, draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml.all@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.105.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-ID: <157081561475.29329.4440266604305969718@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 10:40:14 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/5ELvGO5sbukkOyg0F_Syo7XSpKo>
Subject: [Gen-art] Genart telechat review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml-03
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 11 Oct 2019 17:40:15 -0000

Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review result: Ready with Nits

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

Document: draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml-03
Reviewer: Russ Housley
Review Date: 2019-10-11
IETF LC End Date: 2019-10-10
IESG Telechat date: 2019-10-17

Thank you for addressing my comments on the previous version of this

Summary: Ready with Nits

Major Concerns:


Minor Concerns:



My guess is that the second paragraph in Section 7.1 uses "should"
because it is asking implementors to think about these things when
selecting a clock rate.  I expected this section to be talking about
the payload format parameters, not implementation considerations.  I
am not sure, but this paragraph might be more impactful elsewhere.  

In section and, should the blocks of XML be
enclosed between '<CODE BEGINS>' and '<CODE ENDS>' lines to make it
very clear that the Simplified BSD License applies here?