Re: [payload] I-D Action: draft-ietf-payload-rtp-aptx-01.txt

Hi Harald

Thanks for reviewing this and the points raised.

To increase clarity we can change the statement in section 3

From

Standard apt-X and Enhanced apt-X are proprietary audio coding

   algorithms, licensed by CSR plc and widely deployed in a variety of

   audio processing equipment.

To

Standard apt-X and Enhanced apt-X are proprietary audio coding

   algorithms, which can be licensed from CSR plc and are widely 

  deployed in a variety of audio processing equipment.

Section 3 of the doc provides an overview of the codecs operation. The
aim of the draft is how to packetize Standard or Enhanced apt-X over RTP
not to explain the operation of the codec. Further details are likely to
be proprietary to CSR and interested parties would need to talk to CSR
directly about obtaining licenses and setting up NDA's etc for further
information. 

Regards

John

From: payload-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:payload-bounces@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand
Sent: 17 September 2013 13:53
To: payload@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [payload] I-D Action: draft-ietf-payload-rtp-aptx-01.txt

Brief scan, one question:

Is it possible to offer a stable reference for what "Standard apt-x" and
"Enhanced apt-x" means?

The closest I can get is "licensed by CSR plc", which presumably means
that "it means what CSR plc thinks it means", but it would be great to
have that stated explicitly.

Something like:

The codecs "apt-x" and "Extended apt-x" are defined by CSR plc, an UK
company.

Section 3 of the draft *almost* says that, but isn't completely
unambiguous ("licensed by" can mean both "CSR is a licensor" and "CSR is
a licensee, someone else defines it").

I *think* this is a nit.

On 09/10/2013 03:50 PM, John Lindsay wrote:

	Hi

	A new draft has been uploaded to the IETF Payload workgroup at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/payload/.

	The new document makes a few minor changes for IDNITS checking
and also takes account of the comments made by Peter Stevens last week.

	A summary of the changes are as follows.

	Page 1, IETF Copyright notice updated to 2013.

	Page 10, updated formatting for IDNITS check.

	Page 14, Section 6 updated to reflect RFC 6838 which supersedes
RFC 4288.

	Page 16, Section 6.2.1 type corrected An - A as per Peter
Stevens comments.

	Page 18, Section 7 now reference 6.1 rather than 7.1, again
thanks to Peters proof reading.

	Page 21, new RFC6338 referenced.

	Thanks to everyone who has read and commented on the draft.

	Regards

	John

	_______________________________________________
	payload mailing list
	payload@ietf.org
	https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/payload