[payload] Alissa Cooper's No Objection on draft-ietf-payload-vp8-17: (with COMMENT)

["Alissa Cooper" <[e-mail]>]

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-payload-vp8-17: 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 IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-payload-vp8/



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

-- 4.2: Little confused as to why the I and L behavior is specified
twice, e.g.:

"I: PictureID present.  When set to one, the PictureID MUST be present
      after the extension bit field and specified as below.  Otherwise,
      PictureID MUST NOT be present."

and

"The PictureID extension:  If the I bit is set to one, the PictureID
      extension field MUST be present, and MUST NOT be present
      otherwise."
      
-- 4.2: Why would the index values TL0PICIDX and KEYIDX start at random
values?

-- 6.1: Seconding Pete's old comment that the normative requirements on
use of max-fs and max-fr should appear somewhere other than the media
type definition.