IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [payload] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8331 (5310)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Wed, 28 March 2018 15:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: payload@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: payload@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADDF1120047 for <payload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 08:33:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.89
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.89 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P5eRI7vFTjPx for <payload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 08:33:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBA811275AB for <payload@ietf.org>; Wed, 28 Mar 2018 08:33:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.91] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w2SFXW30056199 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Mar 2018 10:33:33 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.91]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <DE9C1AA0-A177-40C8-82EC-9399C459DA5C@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D5DA83B8-B1A5-4788-8ABF-73DA701556C2"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 10:32:33 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20180328142451.C7395B82180@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, "Ali C. Begen" <ali.begen@networked.media>, "Roni Even (A)" <roni.even@huawei.com>, amalizia@matrox.com
To: thomas.edwards@fox.com, payload@ietf.org
References: <20180328142451.C7395B82180@rfc-editor.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/payload/KVRhWMnQpGl20QzilCH87fWx4OQ>
Subject: Re: [payload] [Editorial Errata Reported] RFC8331 (5310)
X-BeenThere: payload@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Payloads working group discussion list <payload.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/payload>, <mailto:payload-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/payload/>
List-Post: <mailto:payload@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:payload-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/payload>, <mailto:payload-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:33:51 -0000

Hi Thomas and PAYLOAD participants:

What do you think; is the errata report correct? Seems like it is borderline between editorial and technical.

Thanks!

Ben.

> On Mar 28, 2018, at 9:24 AM, RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
> 
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC8331,
> "RTP Payload for Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) ST 291-1 Ancillary Data".
> 
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5310
> 
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Editorial
> Reported by: Anthony Malizia <amalizia@matrox.com>
> 
> Section: 2, Figure 1
> 
> Original Text
> -------------
> Data_Count=0x84
> 
> Data_Count-0x105
> 
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> Data_Count=0x104
> 
> Data_Count-0x205
> 
> Notes
> -----
> In the example described in section 2, the first ANC packet is said to have 4 User_Data_Words, and the second packet is said to have 5 User_Data_Words.  The values in Figure 1 for the Data_Count fields do not have the correct parity bits according to the definition of Data_Count described in section 2.1.
> 
> 4 = 0b0000'0100, with parity bits 0b01'0000'0100 = 0x104
> 
> 5 = 0b0000'0101, with parity bits 0b10'0000'0101 = 0x205
> 
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
> 
> --------------------------------------
> RFC8331 (draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ancillary-14)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : RTP Payload for Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) ST 291-1 Ancillary Data
> Publication Date    : February 2018
> Author(s)           : T. Edwards
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Audio/Video Transport Payloads
> Area                : Applications and Real-Time
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email