1.
'This document has
been produced to describe the report block in sufficient detail to
register the block type with IANA, rather than with the intention of
standardising the report block for use outside BT's network.'
Is this a recommendation not to use this report block outside a private
network? Is the scope of the document limited to providing a
specification in order to fill in the Specification Required policy for
requesting an RTCP XR block type as per 3611 - if this is the case it
should be made clear.
2.
'The metric vrange is the difference between the shortest and longest
network packet delays seen over the duration of the connection to
date. The metric vrange is a positive quantity or (unusually) zero.
The metric vmaxdiff is found as follows. For each RTCP measurement
cycle, find the difference between the shortest and longest network
packet delays within that measurement cycle. These differences are
all positive quantities or (unusually) zero. Take the set of these
differences and find the maximum, which is vmaxdiff. The metric
vmaxdiff is also a positive quantity or (unusually) zero.'
In order for the metrics to be expressed as positive numbers, should not
the differences be defined as between the longest and the shortest
network packet delays, and not the other way?
3. IANA considerations - I think that the Internet Draft should ask
IANA to allocate the first free Block Type number and recommend that
this number be 8, but cannot guarantee that 8 was not allocated until
the time the RFC is approved.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: The IESG [mailto:iesg-secretary(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 8:45 PM
To: IETF-Announce
Subject: Last Call: draft-hunt-avt-rtcpxnq (BT's eXtended
Network Quality RTP Control Protocol Extended Reports (RTCP
XR XNQ)) to Informational RFC
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter
to consider the following document:
- 'BT's eXtended Network Quality RTP Control Protocol
Extended Reports
(RTCP XR XNQ) '
<draft-hunt-avt-rtcpxnq-00.txt> as an Informational RFC
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and
solicits final comments on this action. Please send
substantive comments to the ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org mailing lists by
2007-08-07. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to
iesg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
The file can be obtained via
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hunt-avt-rtcpxnq-00.txt
IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=vie
w_id&dTag=15988&rfc_flag=0
_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
IETF-Announce(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf