[payload] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-payload-rtp-h265-14: (with COMMENT)

["Barry Leiba" <[e-mail]>]

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-payload-rtp-h265-14: 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-rtp-h265/



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

1. Section 1.1 is hugely long, and I wonder why it's necessary.  Can
someone really skip the HEVC reference because you've included all this? 
Is it really worth including all this, when people who need to know it
should be getting it from the proper HEVC documents?

2. In Section 7.1, the media-type registration template has a
tremendously long "optional parameters" section.  I strongly suggest that
you move all that text into another subsection, and refer to it in the
template, like this:

NEW
   OPTIONAL parameters:
      profile-space, tier-flag, profile-id, profile-compatibility-
      indicator, interop-constraints, and level-id.  See
      Section <whatever> of RFC XXXX for details.
END

IANA will keep the template and make it available, and it's not intended
to have such an extended technical exposition in it.  That belongs in the
reference document only.