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@xxxxxxxx] > 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@xxxxxxxx mailing lists by > 2007-08-07. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to > iesg@xxxxxxxx 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@xxxxxxxx > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce > _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf