[MMUSIC] SDP Directorate Feedback for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-loss

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Tue, 04 December 2012 15:47 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B28721F8C36 for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 07:47:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gHptx2A2rUdd for <mmusic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 07:47:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F9BB21F8C35 for <mmusic@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 07:47:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from Orochi.local (99-152-144-32.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net []) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id qB4FlnWA076612 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Dec 2012 09:47:49 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <50BE1B22.90105@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 09:47:46 -0600
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: mmusic@ietf.org, draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-loss@tools.ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060805080809080809080509"
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Subject: [MMUSIC] SDP Directorate Feedback for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-loss
X-BeenThere: mmusic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group <mmusic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mmusic>
List-Post: <mailto:mmusic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mmusic>, <mailto:mmusic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 15:47:51 -0000

I have been asked to perform the SDP Directorate review for 
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-loss. I reviewed the -05 version of 
the document.

In general, the syntax looks fine -- this document makes use of a 
defined extension point in RFC 3611. I find no mismatch between the 
proposed semantics of this document and what appears to be intended by 
xrblock usage.

I found a handful of tiny nits in the IANA section:

 1. The first line of section 6.1 says "NDEL" where it means "NBGL." I
    would imagine this gets cleaned up during IANA review, but there's
    no point leaving it confusing.

 2. Section 6.2 refers to the "RTCP XR SDP Parameters Registry," whereas
    IANA has titled the registry "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports
    (RTCP XR) Session Description Protocol (SDP) Parameters Registry"
    It would help readers of this document who wish to locate the
    registry if the precise IANA name were used.

 3. Section 6.1 has a similar mismatch, using "RTCP XR Block Type
    Registry" rather than "RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP
    XR) Block Type Registry"