[payload] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6190 (3711)

RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> Mon, 26 August 2013 16:31 UTC

Return-Path: <wwwrun@rfc-editor.org>
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 D432311E81BD for <payload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.36
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.36 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.240, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id beeiIdItSlx6 for <payload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:123a::1:2f]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D36211E81BB for <payload@ietf.org>; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:31:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by rfc-editor.org (Postfix, from userid 30) id 54E0B8E018; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:26:42 -0700 (PDT)
To: stewe@stewe.org, yekui.wang@huawei.com, ts@thomas-schierl.de, alex@vidyo.com, rlb@ipv.sx, gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com, abegen@cisco.com, roni.even@mail01.huawei.com
From: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Message-Id: <20130826162642.54E0B8E018@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:26:42 -0700
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 09:33:00 -0700
Cc: payload@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: [payload] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6190 (3711)
X-BeenThere: payload@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:31:46 -0000

The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6190,
"RTP Payload Format for Scalable Video Coding".

--------------------------------------
You may review the report below and at:
http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=6190&eid=3711

--------------------------------------
Type: Technical
Reported by: Xiaohui Wei (Joanne) <weix@avaya.com>

Section: 1.1.3

Original Text
-------------
   N:    1 bit
         no_inter_layer_pred_flag.  This flag specifies, when present in
         a coded slice NAL unit, whether inter-layer prediction may be
         used for decoding the coded slice (when equal to 1) or not
         (when equal to 0).

Corrected Text
--------------
   N:    1 bit
         no_inter_layer_pred_flag.  This flag specifies, when present in
         a coded slice NAL unit, whether inter-layer prediction may be
         used for decoding the coded slice (when equal to 0) or not
                                                          ^
         (when equal to 1).
                        ^

Notes
-----


Instructions:
-------------
This errata 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 (IESG)
can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. 

--------------------------------------
RFC6190 (draft-ietf-avt-rtp-svc-27)
--------------------------------------
Title               : RTP Payload Format for Scalable Video Coding
Publication Date    : May 2011
Author(s)           : S. Wenger, Y.-K. Wang, T. Schierl, A. Eleftheriadis
Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
Source              : Audio/Video Transport Payloads
Area                : Real-time Applications and Infrastructure
Stream              : IETF
Verifying Party     : IESG