IETF Logo Mail Archive

[xrblock] 答复: SDP directorate review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability-02

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Thu, 24 April 2014 02:11 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.com>
X-Original-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF12D1A0103; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.478
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, CHARSET_FARAWAY_HEADER=3.2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 tZLbxylACWV0; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:11:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 276751A00F4; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 19:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BDK83963; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 02:11:44 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) by lhreml204-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.7.223) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 03:11:02 +0100
Received: from NKGEML408-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.39) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 03:11:43 +0100
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.85]) by nkgeml408-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.39]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 10:11:36 +0800
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>, "xrblock@ietf.org" <xrblock@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: SDP directorate review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability-02
Thread-Index: Ac9e34bT8uRPa5C7TbaBxzCYiGKRmQABT4dwAB9NP7A=
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 02:11:36 +0000
Message-ID: <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA84514991@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D2D70A8@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA5C7C51E0@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA5C7C51E0@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.114]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA84514991nkgeml501mbschi_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xrblock/E_NNJ4HxO1L5ECMLQFBi-ucOVDo
Cc: "mmusic@ietf.org" <mmusic@ietf.org>, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
Subject: [xrblock] 答复: SDP directorate review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability-02
X-BeenThere: xrblock@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Metric Blocks for use with RTCP's Extended Report Framework working group discussion list <xrblock.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xrblock/>
List-Post: <mailto:xrblock@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 02:11:54 -0000

Yes, taking completeness into consideration, Christer¡¯s suggestion makes sense to me.
We can add a new subsection to say for non-Offer/Answer usage, section 5.3 of RFC3611 applies.

Regards!
-Qin
·¢¼þÈË: xrblock [mailto:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] ´ú±í Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
·¢ËÍʱ¼ä: 2014Äê4ÔÂ23ÈÕ 19:13
ÊÕ¼þÈË: xrblock@ietf.org
³­ËÍ: Christer Holmberg
Ö÷Ìâ: [xrblock] FW: SDP directorate review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability-02

See below the SDP review by Christer Holmberg.

Thanks, Christer!

Authors ¨C can you address the question asked by the reviewer?

Thanks and Regards,

Dan


From: mmusic [mailto:mmusic-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Christer Holmberg
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 1:45 PM
To: mmusic (E-mail)
Cc: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability@tools.ietf.org<mailto:draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: [MMUSIC] SDP directorate review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability-02

Hi,

I have performed the SDP directorate review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-psi-decodability-02.

As the document only extends the SDP rtcp-xr-attrib attribute, and refers to RFC 3611 for the associated Offer/Answer procedures.

Now, the Offer/Answer procedures in RFC 3611 could REALLY use some work, but it is of course not the purpose of this draft to fix that :)

However, RFC 3611 does also have a section (5.3) about non-Offer/Answer usage, but the draft does not say anything about that. For completeness, should there be a section, referring to RFC 3611 also for that?

Regards,

Christer

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email