Skip to main content

Additional WebRTC Audio Codecs for Interoperability
RFC 7875

Yes

(Alissa Cooper)

No Objection

Alvaro Retana
(Alexey Melnikov)
(Ben Campbell)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Kathleen Moriarty)
(Mirja Kühlewind)
(Terry Manderson)

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

Alvaro Retana No Objection

(Alissa Cooper; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (for -05)

                            

(Spencer Dawkins; former steering group member) Yes

Yes (2016-04-20 for -05)
I remember that the "but what about THIS audio codec?" discussions were pretty contentious for a while, and wanted to say that this document does a really good job of handling that question. Thanks for producing it.

(Alexey Melnikov; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -05)

                            

(Ben Campbell; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -05)

                            

(Benoît Claise; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2016-04-18 for -05)
Shucheng LIU's OPS DIR review:

**** Editorial ****

 

* Section 2, page 3:

> 

>    o  Legacy networks: In this document, legacy networks encompass the

>       conversational networks that are already deployed like the PSTN,

>       the PLMN, the IP/IMS networks offering VoIP services, including

>       3GPP "4G" Evolved Packet System[TS23.002]

 

Missing space in "Evolved Packet System[TS23.002]"

 

 

* Section 2, page 3:

>  o  PSTN:Public Switched Telephone Network

 

Missing space.

 

 

* Section 3, page 4:

>  Consequently,

>    a significant number of calls are likely to occur between terminals

>    supporting WebRTC endpoints and other terminals like mobile handsets,

>    fixed VoIP terminals, DECT terminals that do not support WebRTC

>    endpoints nor implement OPUS. 

 

Seems should  s/terminals, DECT terminals/terminals, and DECT terminals/

 

 

* Section 3: each of the bullets is separated by two blank lines rather than a single one.

 

 

* Section 4.1.1, page 5:

> especially

 

s/especially/specially/

 

 

* Section 4.1.3, page 5:

>    The payload format to be used for AMR-WB is described in [RFC4867]

>    with bandwidth efficient format and one speech frame encapsulated in

>    each RTP packets

 

s/packets/packet/

 

 

* Section 4.2.1, page 6:

>  This include both mobile phone calls using GSM and 3G

 

s/include/includes/

 

 

* Section 4.2.1, page 6:

> such as, GSMA voice IMS profile for VoLTE in [IR.92].

 

Please remove the comma.

 

 

* Section 4.2.1, page 6:

>    degrading the high efficiency over mobile radio access.References

> for

 

Missing space.

 

 

* Section 4.2.3, page 7:

>    The payload format to be used for AMR is described in [RFC4867] with

>    bandwidth efficient format and one speech frame encapsulated in each

>    RTP packets.

 

s/packets/packet/

(Deborah Brungard; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -05)

                            

(Joel Jaeggli; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2016-04-18 for -05)
Will Liushucheng performed the opsdir review.

(Kathleen Moriarty; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -05)

                            

(Mirja Kühlewind; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -05)

                            

(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2016-04-19 for -05)
section 3: MOS could do with a reference

(Terry Manderson; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (for -05)