Re: [MMUSIC] draft-pthatcher-mmusic-rid-02

Just a few comments on this version!

* Section 6:

    o  max-fs, for frame size in pixels per frame.  This is the product
       of frame width and frame height, in pixels, for rectangular
       frames.

Are non-rectangular frames possible? If so, what would this mean in that 
case? Does it mean:

- for rectangular frames the max-fs is the product of frame width and 
height, while it can also be used for non-rectangular frames, using some 
other algorithm?

- OR, does it mean that this can only be used for rectangular frames?

* Section 7.4.  (Offering Processing of the SDP Answer)

*Offering* processing??? Is this a spec for a church? :-)

I think you mean "Offer Processing".

Then:

        ... If the rid-
        level parameters are incompatible with the other codec
        properties, then the "a=rid" line is removed.

I don't think it works for the offerer to remove the rid at this point. 
The answerer thinks its answer was ok and use of rid is in effect. So 
some more drastic action is needed to get the two in sync.

	Thanks,
	Paul

On 10/19/15 5:14 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
> Based on feedback received on the -01 draft, I have updated the RID
> draft again:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pthatcher-mmusic-rid-01
>
> Diffs from the previous version:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-pthatcher-mmusic-rid-02.txt
>
> And recognizing that this is moving fairly quickly, here's a diff from
> the -00 version:
>
> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-pthatcher-mmusic-rid-00.txt&url2=draft-pthatcher-mmusic-rid-02.txt
>
>
> [AVTEXT is copied on this email for their awareness of the SDES work
> described in this document -- please send any followups to MMUSIC]
>
> /a
>
> _______________________________________________
> mmusic mailing list
> mmusic@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic
>