[MMUSIC] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-04: (with COMMENT)

[Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis-04: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc8843bis/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks a lot for the efforts put into this document.

I don't have much to add other than some minor comments (would be nice if
addressed but feel free to ignore them ) below-

  * I think the paragraph below is best fitted in the section 5 due to the use
  of normative language.( I also understand this might be a matter of taste.)
      "A given BUNDLE address:port MUST only be associated with a single
   BUNDLE group.  If an SDP offer or SDP answer (hereafter referred to
   as "offer" and "answer") contains multiple BUNDLE groups, the
   procedures in this specification apply to each group independently.
   All RTP-based bundled media associated with a given BUNDLE group
   belong to a single RTP session [RFC3550]."

  * The title for section 7.2 is kind of misleading. This section is about
  initial BUNDLE offer, not really initial SDP offer and there is a difference
  between the initial offer and initial BUNDLE offer.
          Suggestion:  s/Generating the Initial SDP Offer/ Generating the
          Initial BUNDLE Offer.
    The same comment applies for section 7.2.2