ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Review of draft-ietf-clue-rtp-mapping-10

2017-01-11 02:06:25
Hi,
Thanks for the review
Inline
Roni

-----Original Message-----
From: =?utf-
8?b?SsO8cmdlbiBTY2jDtm53w6RsZGVyIDxqLnNjaG9lbndhZWxkZXJAamFj?=
@ietfa.amsl.com [mailto:=?utf-
8?b?SsO8cmdlbiBTY2jDtm53w6RsZGVyIDxqLnNjaG9lbndhZWxkZXJAamFj?=
@ietfa.amsl.com]
Sent: יום ג 03 ינואר 2017 13:50
To: ops-dir(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Cc: clue(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; 
draft-ietf-clue-rtp-mapping(_dot_)all(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Review of draft-ietf-clue-rtp-mapping-10

Reviewer: Jürgen Schönwälder
Review result: Has Nits

I do not see any major OPS related issues. While reading the document, I
found a number of things the authors should look into:

- Consider to expand SDP and perhaps CLUE in the abstract
[Roni Even] OK

- Having both CaptureId and CaptureID in 5.1 is a bit confusing (since
  the two identifiers only differ by the capitalization of the last
  character)
[Roni Even] I will change it

- Both nXML mode in emacs and xmlint indicate that the xml in section
  6 is invalid. Please check. (It could also be an issue with my tools
  and the namespaces but then also the indentation looks at least
  somewhat surprising.
[Roni Even] This are partial examples from the clue data model document just to 
show the relevant part. They were not meant to be valid xml , I can add text to 
explain this

- Is the RFC editor expected to       replace XX in the drawing in section
  5.1 with the value assigned for TBA? If so, I think this needs to be
  documented somewhere.
[Roni Even] OK

- Is 'roni(_dot_)even(_at_)mail01(_dot_)huawei(_dot_)com' is a long term 
stable identifier
  for the 'Contact' field of the RTP SDES Compact Header Extensions
  subregistry?
[Roni Even] I will provide a better email address

- Security considerations, last       paragraph: What is 'a lot of trust'?
  Why is the SHOULD not       a MUST?
[Roni Even] I agree, it is also a passive language
Old text
"In multi-party communication scenarios using RTP Middleboxes, a lot of trust 
is placed on these middleboxes to preserve the sessions security"
New text
"In multi-party communication scenarios using RTP Middleboxes; these 
middleboxes are trusted to preserve the sessions security"

As for the "SHOULD maintain" it may depend on application policies (for example 
allowing users with different security levels into a multipoint conference)


- s/CaptureIDis/CaptureID is/g
[Roni Even] OK

- According to idnits, there are RFCs listed in the references that
  are not cited in the text; please pay attention to idnits reports
[Roni Even] OK



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>