Re: [Gen-art] [AVT] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-beam-10.txt

Futemma-san,

> I have sent the mail about the priority mapping of
> progression based ordering.
> So, I reply to the other comments on the mail.
> 
> Black_David@emc.com wrote:
> > [2] The review of the -09 version stated "Section 4.1 contains this
> > problematic text:
> > 
> >    An initial value of mh_id MUST be selected randomly between 1 and
7
> >    for security reasons."
> > 
> > This has been partially addressed.  While section 2.1 now requires
that
> > the initial value of mh_id always be zero, the above "problematic
text"
> > remains, and still needs to be removed from Section 4.1.
> 
> I will change the sentence in Section 2.1.

Please *remove* the quoted sentence from Section 4.1.  There is
essentially no security value in a random number that is limited
to 7 possible values.  If that sentence is going to remain in
Section 4.1, the words "for security purposes" should be removed.

> > In addition, Security Considerations paragraph on mh_id concludes
with
> > a rather cryptic statement that "Care should be taken to prevent
> > implementation bugs with potential security consequences."  Either
> > more specific guidance should be given, or the entire paragraph
should
> > be removed, as mh_id does not appear to have any security value.
> 
> Pasi suggested the paragraph which we agree to.
> 
> So how about replacing the last sentence with:
> 
>    "Even if the incorrect main header is passed, the standard
>     JPEG 2000 decoder could detect inconsistency of the codestream
>     and process it properly. It is recommended to clear the saved
>     mh_id if the decoder detect such an inconsistency."

Ok.

> > In addition, there is a new open issue:
> > 
> > [3] Section 7 does not appear to instruct IANA on what is to be
done.
> > It appears that IANA should add the new parameters in section 5 to
> > the existing registration of a media type, but neither section 5
> > nor section 7 tells IANA what do to or which media type registration
> > is to be modified.
> 
> All right,
> 
> Here is the modification plan.
> 
> In Section 5:
> 
>    The document extends the associated media type "video/jpeg2000"
>    from RFC XXXY [1]. Here are additional optional parameters.

Ok.

> > Nits:
> > 
> > Reference [1] has still not been corrected.  The Gen-ART review of
> > the -09 version stated:
> > 
> >   Reference [1] should reference the Internet Draft by name.
> >    [1]  Futemma, "RTP Payload Format for JPEG 2000 Video Streams",
> >         RFC XXXY, April 2007.
> >   I believe this is draft-ietf-avt-rtp-jpeg2000-18.txt.  That should
> >   be in the reference instead of RFC XXXY.  Then add an RFC Editor
> >   note asking the RFC Editor to replace all instances of RFC XXXY
> >   with the RFC number assigned when reference [1] is published as an
> > RFC.
> > 
> > The version of this draft has now advanced to -19.
> 
> I agree.

Ok.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Distinguished Engineer
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
black_david@emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art