Re: [MMUSIC] draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-06 review

[Suhas Nandakumar <[e-mail]>]

Thanks Ari .. I will go ahead and submit a new version with the fix


Also I am seeing a problem with the hyperlink to BUNDLE draft
  - The link leads to a wrong place when tried in this html link:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-07
  - but leads to the right place when tried with this HTML link :
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-mux-attributes-07.html

Any ideas why this could be happening

Cheers
Suhas

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Ari Keränen <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Hi Suhas,
>
> That's better, thanks!
>
> There might be a word missing though. I'd suggest, e.g.:
> s/and thus carried/and are thus carried/
>
>
> Cheers,
> Ari
>
> On 16/01/15 05:05, Suhas Nandakumar wrote:
>
>> Thanks Ari for the review. Regarding the abstract, please let me know if
>> the below introductory paragraph captures what is needed.
>>
>> "The Session Description Protocol (SDP) provides mechanisms to
>>         describe attributes of multimedia sessions and of individual media
>>         streams (e.g., Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) sessions)
>> within a
>>         multimedia session. Typically media associated with individual
>>         media descriptions ("m=" lines) represent separate RTP Sessions
>>         and thus carried over individual underlying transport layer flows.
>>         For scenarios
>>         where SDP is used to negotiate the usage of single 5-tuple for
>>         sending and receiving media associated with multiple media
>> descriptions, it is required to understand the semantic implications of
>> the  attributes associated with the RTP Media Streams multiplexed over a
>>         single underlying transport layer flow"
>>
>> Thanks
>> Suhas
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 5:25 AM, Ari Keränen <[e-mail]
>> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi Suhas,
>>
>>     I have couple of more comments on the latest draft's bundle
>> references.
>>
>>     The Bundle draft is currently listed as Informative reference, but
>>     considering how Bundle is referenced and used in this document, I
>>     think it should be a Normative reference instead.
>>
>>     Also, in general the Abstract should not contain references (unless
>>     they are completely defined within the Abstract; see [1] for
>>     details), so I would suggest replacing the Bundle draft reference in
>>     the Abstract with some more general text about the Bundling feature.
>>
>>     Finally, I noticed that the latest version has many of the MUSTs and
>>     MAYs changed to (non-RFC2119) lower case versions. What was the
>>     reason for this? For some I see why, e.g., in "This may or may not
>>     work [...]", but for some, e.g. "multiplexing must not be performed
>>     even in this alternate scenario" RFC2119 language seems more
>>     appropriate.
>>
>>
>>     Cheers,
>>     Ari
>>
>>     [1] http://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/__1id-guidelines.txt
>>     <http://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/1id-guidelines.txt>
>>
>>
>>
>