Telechat Review of draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml-03
review-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml-03-genart-telechat-housley-2019-10-11-00
| Request | Review of | draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml |
|---|---|---|
| Requested revision | No specific revision (document currently at 06) | |
| Type | Telechat Review | |
| Team | General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart) | |
| Deadline | 2019-10-15 | |
| Requested | 2019-10-09 | |
| Authors | James Sandford | |
| I-D last updated | 2019-10-11 | |
| Completed reviews |
Genart Last Call review of -02
by Russ Housley
(diff)
Genart Telechat review of -03 by Russ Housley (diff) |
|
| Assignment | Reviewer | Russ Housley |
| State | Completed | |
| Request | Telechat review on draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned | |
| Posted at | https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/5ELvGO5sbukkOyg0F_Syo7XSpKo | |
| Reviewed revision | 03 (document currently at 06) | |
| Result | Ready w/nits | |
| Completed | 2019-10-11 |
review-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml-03-genart-telechat-housley-2019-10-11-00
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like any other last call comments. For more information, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Document: draft-ietf-payload-rtp-ttml-03 Reviewer: Russ Housley Review Date: 2019-10-11 IETF LC End Date: 2019-10-10 IESG Telechat date: 2019-10-17 Thank you for addressing my comments on the previous version of this Internet-Draft. Summary: Ready with Nits Major Concerns: None. Minor Concerns: None. Nits: My guess is that the second paragraph in Section 7.1 uses "should" because it is asking implementors to think about these things when selecting a clock rate. I expected this section to be talking about the payload format parameters, not implementation considerations. I am not sure, but this paragraph might be more impactful elsewhere. In section 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.1.2.1.2, should the blocks of XML be enclosed between '<CODE BEGINS>' and '<CODE ENDS>' lines to make it very clear that the Simplified BSD License applies here?