Last Call Review of draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-04
review-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-04-genart-lc-miller-2016-03-03-00

I am the coincidentally-assigned Gen-ART and SecDir reviewer
for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF
documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  The Security
Directorate reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for
the security area directors.  Please treat these comments just like any
other last call comments that arrived on time.

For more information on Gen-Art, please see the FAQ at

<

http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq

 >.

Document: draft-ietf-avtext-splicing-notification-04
Reviewer: Matthew Miller
Review Date: 2016-02-26
IETF LC End Date: 2016-02-26
IESG Telechat date: N/A

Summary:

Ready with a minor issue.

Major issues:

Minor issues:

* I didn't see any discussion of the case where the RTP extension and the RTCP
message don't agree on the interval.  Well-behaved software shouldn't do this,
but it seems like something that could happen.  I'm not sure what should be
done in this case, but it seems to me like something to at least acknowledge it.

Nits/editorial comments:

* idnits is reporting a bad reference to "3711" Section 7 "Security
Considerations", and that RFC 3711 is an unused normative reference.  I think
this is because the pointer to it in Section 7 doesn't start with "RFC".

* In Section 1. "Introduction", it seems to me "However" would be a better word
than "Nevertheless" to use here.

--
- m&m

Matt Miller
Cisco Systems, Inc.

Attachment:

signature.asc

Description:

 Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail