Last Call Review of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-post-repair-loss-count-07
review-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-post-repair-loss-count-07-opsdir-lc-tsou-2014-12-28-00

Dear all,

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG. These comments
were written primarily for the benefit of the operational area directors.
Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other
last call comments.

Intended status: standard track

Summary: This document defines a new RTCP XR block to carry post repair loss
count metrics. I found it is well written with no real concerns. I do have some
minor comments and questions.

- Section 1, 1st paragraph, last sentence,
The overhead is Higher comparing with who? What is the overhead about?
Suggested change is
s/higher overhead/ high bandwidth consumption
What do you mean by using multiple XR blocks, containing multiple XR blocks in
the same RTCP XR compound packet or something else?

- section 1, 2nd paragraph said:
"
In addition,  another metric, repaired loss count,
is also introduced in this report block for calculating the pre-
repair loss count during the this range
"
Is the second metric pre-repair loss count? Isn't pre-repair loss count defined
in RTCP Sender Reports (SR)/Receiver Reports (RR)[RFC3550].Also in the section
3,the second metric, i.e.,"loss repair count" is defined as "Total number of
packets fully repaired after one or more loss-repair methods, e.g., FEC and/or
retransmission during this interval" It is obvious the second metric is used to
count the number of the packet loss after the repair method is used, i.e., post
repair loss?

- Section 3, definition of "unrepaired loss count"
What interval are you referred to ?I think you use begin sequence number and
end sequence number to explicitly indicate the actual sequence number range. So
suggested change is s/during the interval/ during the sequence number interval.

Happy Holidays!

Thank you,
Tina