Re: [payload] Update of security template text in draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto

[Ross Finlayson <[e-mail]>]

This looks good.  However, fixing some minor nits:

> NEW:
> 
>   RTP packets using the payload format defined in this specification
>   are subject to the security considerations discussed in the RTP
>   specification [RFC3550] , and in any applicable RTP profile such as
>   RTP/AVP [RFC3551], RTP/AVPF [RFC4585], RTP/SAVP [RFC3711] or RTP/
>   SAVPF [RFC5124].  However, as "Securing the RTP Protocol Framework:
>   Why RTP Does Not Mandate a Single Media Security Solution" [RFC7202]
>   discusses it is not an RTP payload formats responsibility to discuss

Add a comma after “discusses’.  Also: “formats” -> “format’s”

>   or mandate what solutions are used to meet the basic security goals
>   like confidentiality, integrity and source authenticity for RTP in
>   general.  This responsibility lays on anyone using RTP in an
>   application.  They can find guidance on available security mechanisms
>   and important considerations in Options for Securing RTP Sessions
>   [RFC7201].  Applications SHOULD use one or more appropriate strong
>   security mechanisms.  The rest of the this security consideration

Remove “the”.  Also, perhaps, add “section” before the following:

>   discusses the security impacting properties of the payload format
>   itself.


    Ross.