Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-meas-identity-06
From: "Vijay K. Gurbani" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: Shida Schubert <[email-masked]>, General Area Review Team <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 15:21:38 -0500
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>

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-xrblock-rtcp-xr-meas-identity-06
Reviewer: Vijay K. Gurbani
Review Date: May-31-2012
IETF LC End Date: June-14-2012
IESG Telechat date: Not known

Summary: This draft is ready as a Proposed Standard; it has one minor
comment that should be fixed before publication.

Major: 0
Minor: 1
Nits: 0

Minor:

- In S6, the text says that "... the use of security mechanisms with
  RTP, as documented in Section 9 of [RFC3550] SHOULD apply."

  I am puzzled by the normative language here.  Won't it be more proper
  to simply say that "... the use of security mechanisms with RTP, as
  documented in Section 9 of [RFC3550] apply."

  The use of SHOULD seem to indicate that there are certain cases
  during measurement reporting where the security considerations do not
  apply.  Surely you do not mean that, do you?

Thanks,

- vijay
-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60563 (USA)
Email: vkg@{bell-labs.com,acm.org} / [email-masked]
Web:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/