Subject: [payload] I-D Action: draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-10.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 02:48:37 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Audio/Video Transport Payloads Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : How to Write an RTP Payload Format
	Author(s)       : Magnus Westerlund
	Filename        : draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-10.txt
	Pages           : 59
	Date            : 2013-12-09

Abstract:
   This document contains information on how to best write an RTP
   payload format specification.  It provides reading tips, design
   practices, and practical tips on how to produce an RTP payload format
   specification quickly and with good results.  A template is also
   included with instructions.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-10

A diff from the previous version is available at:
http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-10

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 11:55:56 +0100

WG,

As the diff shows this is mostly typos and making references show the
relevant information. :

However, I would like to make you aware of the one major changes in this
document related to our AD's comment regarding the codec format
normative reference. Richard said:

> General: It seems like it would be helpful for this draft to address
> one other point that may not be clear to first-timers:  The payload
> specification does not need to describe the coding, and in fact we
> have several (open) payload specs for proprietary (closed) protocols.
> The codec itself can be treated as a black box, as long as the
> payload format tells an implementation how to configure that box and
> format its inputs/outputs.

This has resulted in a new paragraph in Section 7.1:

   The actual specification of the RTP payload format generally uses
   normative references to the codec format specification to define how
   codec data elements are included in the payload format.  This
   normative reference can be to anything that have sufficient stability
   for a normative reference.  There exist no formal requirement on the
   codec format specification being publicly available or free to
   access.  However, it significantly helps in the review process if
   that specification is made available to any reviewer.  There exist
   RTP payload format RFCs for open source project specifications as
   well as an individual company's proprietary format, and a large
   variety of standards development organizations or industrial forums.

I personally believe this document is now ready for IESG review.

Cheers

Magnus

On 2013-12-09 11:48, [email-masked] wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> I-D-Announce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> 
> 

-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------