[video-codec] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-netvc-testing-08

Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Fri, 14 June 2019 23:07 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: ops-dir@ietf.org
Cc: draft-ietf-netvc-testing.all@ietf.org, video-codec@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Linda Dunbar <ldunbar@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <156055366901.28347.16629268075901765352@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 16:07:49 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/video-codec/FAxJ4wUskJWHxIgmHDvrk2ElBCs>
Subject: [video-codec] Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-netvc-testing-08

Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review result: Has Nits

Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review result: Ready with Comments & Nits

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of
the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included
in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

This document describes the guidelines and procedures for evaluating images &
videos.  Even though I am not a video/codec expert, the document is written
clear enough for me to follow through.

Only one part not clear: There are many image names being listed in the Section
5.2.2 ~5.2.5. Are those image names significant?  I see some of those names are
listed in the [TESTSEQUENCE] reference. But I don't understand why need to
literally list those names. What the reason for listing them? those names
occupied many pages, kind of diluting the other procedures being described.

Best Regards,
Linda Dunbar

[video-codec] Opsdir telechat review of draft-iet… Linda Dunbar via Datatracker