[Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-codec-oggopus-10

Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Mon, 15 February 2016 17:25 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A1C21A9035; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:25:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.702
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.702 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gqcl4sYP87B1; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:25:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C28641A9032; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:25:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 582089E003C; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:25:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=1.tigertech; t=1455557121; bh=Vz6LZLV6ElBdvjI9VxDz4R7eN4DjdIXb+p+nCELGhXs=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=keOk2T5nAr6rNWpIUJr9WtBNRVWb4ptbZ+rhGdiqYos5SnglbOJ70HGRgval+dJJK 6t2RtRB40PidkSe71ryFYbwIDqIFo2pwcvgWq7dHEqD/dnt11ZOSxbbk4SKFci9GSW vX8rkXNyHzGsZlWi97grX3pcpltS5YzklHTuITh0=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net
Received: from Joels-MacBook-Pro.local (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A42801C5BDF; Mon, 15 Feb 2016 09:25:20 -0800 (PST)
To: "A. Jean Mahoney" <mahoney@nostrum.com>, General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-codec-oggopus.all@ietf.org
References: <569820FC.7050309@nostrum.com> <56997225.9000405@joelhalpern.com>
From: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <56C209FA.7070900@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 12:25:14 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <56997225.9000405@joelhalpern.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/ewjCH49fGRNs7lCqqJ13z5dP5ZE>
Subject: [Gen-art] Review: draft-ietf-codec-oggopus-10
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: <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: Mon, 15 Feb 2016 17:25:23 -0000

Yes, draft 13 addresses all my comments (and also addresses issues I 
engaged them on following the review) and is ready for publication as a 
Proposed Standard.

My thanks to the authors for their work.


On 1/15/16 5:26 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> 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
> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
> Document: draft-ietf-codec-oggopus-10
>      Ogg Encapsulation for the Opus Audio Codec
> Reviewer: Joel M. Halpern
> Review Date:
> IETF LC End Date: 27-January-2016
> IESG Telechat date: N/A
> Summary:
>      This document is nearly ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.
>      The reviewer believes the status issues needs to be addressed, and
> would like the minor issue identified below discussed.
> Major issues:
>      I do not see how we can have a standards track document for using
> an Informational format.  RFC 3533 is Informational.  At the very least,
> the last call needed to identify the downref to RFC 3533.  (It is not
> clear whether the reference to RFC 4732 needs to be normative or could
> be informative.)
> Minor issues:
>      While I do not completely understand ogg lacing values, there
> appears to be an internal inconsistency in the text in section 3:
> 1) "if the previous page with packet data does not end in a continued
> packet (i.e., did not end with a lacing value of 255)"
> 2) "a packet that continues onto a subsequent page (i.e., when the page
> ends with a lacing value of 255)"
>      The first quote says that continued packets end with a lacing value
> of 255, and the second quote says that continued packets end with a
> lacing value of less than 255.  At the very least, these need to be
> clarified.
> Nits/editorial comments:
>      is there some way to indicate that the ogg encoding constraints
> (e.g. 48kHz granule and 2.5 ms timing) are sufficiently broad to cover
> all needed cases?
> Yours,
> Joel Halpern
> _______________________________________________
> Gen-art mailing list
> Gen-art@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art