Media Type Registration of RTP Payload Formats
draft-ietf-avt-rfc3555bis-05

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert No Objection

  Inconsistent use of RFC2119 terms in draft-ietf-avt-rfc3555bis-04 in
  the beginning of Section 2, i.e., before Section 2.1. There are many
  lowercase instances of these terms that should be uppercased IMO. I
  included one example below, there are several other cases.

Section 2., paragraph 2:
>      Required parameters
>           If the payload format does not have a fixed RTP timestamp
>           clock rate, then a "rate" parameter is required to specify the
>           RTP timestamp clock rate.  A particular payload format may
>           have additional required parameters.

  s/required/REQUIRED/

(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) Yes

(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection

(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) No Objection

(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) No Objection

(David Kessens; former steering group member) No Objection

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection

(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection

(Lisa Dusseault; former steering group member) (was Yes) No Objection

(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection

(Ross Callon; former steering group member) No Objection

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) No Objection

(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) No Objection

(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) Recuse