Telechat Review of draft-ietf-payload-vp8-09
review-ietf-payload-vp8-09-genart-telechat-davies-2013-09-11-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-payload-vp8 |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 17) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2013-07-16 | |
| Requested | 2013-07-11 | |
| Authors | Patrik Westin , Henrik Lundin , Michael Glover , Justin Uberti , Frank Galligan | |
| I-D last updated | 2013-09-11 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -08
by Elwyn B. Davies
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -09 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff) Genart Telechat review of -16 by Elwyn B. Davies (diff) Genart Last Call review of -17 by Elwyn B. Davies Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Brian Weis (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Elwyn B. Davies |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-payload-vp8 by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Reviewed revision | 09 (document currently at 17) | |
| Result | Ready | |
| Completed | 2013-09-11 |
review-ietf-payload-vp8-09-genart-telechat-davies-2013-09-11-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at < http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-payload-vp8-08 Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review Date: 12 July 2013 IETF LC End Date: 18 June 2013 IESG Telechat date: (if known) 18 July 2013 Summary: Essentially ready. The nits from the last call review have mostly been fixed - thanks. The issues with the references section have only ben partly dealt with and there are still a mixture of bytes and octets. There is a rather awkquard downref to the VP8 coded data format RFC 6386 - take advice from your AD on this one (he may already have given it). Major issues: Minor issues: Nits/editorial comments: General: Consistent use of octets instead of bytes. s10: Are all of the refs normative? If so change the section title. The only one which I am dubious about is RFC 4566 (and there is 6386 - see next comment). s10: idnits complains that RFC 3984 is not referenced (sorry the LC review said 3894), and RFC 6386 is a downref (you had better ask your AD about this downref - it is fairly fundamental!)