RTP Payload for Text Conversation
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 09 and is now closed.
(Allison Mankin) Yes
(Harald Alvestrand) No Objection
Reviewed by Michael Patton, Gen-ART His review: Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication as Proposed Standard, but has nits that should be fixed before publication. All of these are in the xcope of what can be done in RFC final prep. ---------------------------------------------------------------- While reference  is not required to understand the protocol itself, it's important to the understanding of the "Security Considerations" and I therefore think that it should be Normative. [This next one is really almost just a typo, but the one word change actually changes the meaning, so I put it up front. I think this is actually the point the authors are trying to make, since the original wording seems a non-sequitur to me.] In the third paragraph of Section 9 is the phrase "this application will experience very high packet loss rates before it needs to perform any reduction in the sending rate." I believe the authors mean that the application works fine even in the face of large loss rates, but that's not actually what their chosen words mean, the actual words imply that something will cause the application to experience higher loss. If that's really the intent, I believe that can be fixed by simply changing the word "will" to "can". If they meant something else, more extensive rewording is needed. Typos ----- Section 1: "in connection to" => "in connection with" Section 3.1: "are depending on" => "are dependent on"
(Margaret Cullen) No Objection
(Bill Fenner) No Objection
(Sam Hartman) No Objection
(Scott Hollenbeck) No Objection
Two-week MIME type review period for text/t140 ends on 2 December. Please confirm that no issues are identified (none have been raised so far).
(Russ Housley) (was Discuss) No Objection
(Thomas Narten) No Objection
(Bert Wijnen) No Objection
I see mixed use of "T140block" and "T.140block" Are they not the same? If so, maybe a consistent notation would be better. Same for "T140" and "T.140" *** matchref -- match citations and references. Input file: draft-ietf-avt-rfc2793bis-09.txt !! Missing citation for Normative reference: P017 L056:  Postel, J.,"Internet Protocol", RFC 791, 1981. !! Missing citation for Informative reference: P018 L015:  Schulzrinne, H., Petrack, S., "RTP Payload for DTMF Digits,