Hi, When the last call has ended I will update the draft with the changes identified. Mykyta Yevstifeyev skrev 2011-04-29 18:04: > Magnus, > > 29.04.2011 11:47, Magnus Westerlund wrote: >> Hi Mykyta, >> >> Thanks for the review. >> >> See inline for response. >> >> Mykyta Yevstifeyev skrev 2011-04-28 19:22: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Some comments on this document, currently in Last Call. >>> >>>> Network Working Group M. Westerlund >>>> Internet-Draft Ericsson >>>> Updates: 5245 (if approved) C. Perkins >>>> Intended status: Standards Track University of Glasgow >>>> Expires: September 29, 2011 March 28, 2011 >>> I don't see why the intended status for this document is Standards >>> Track. Wouldn't Informational be enough? Could you please justify why >>> have you chosen it? >> I don't think we have put much thought into it. But one reason I can >> think of is to have it on the same maturity level as the ICE >> specification itself. Thus enabling a merge of this registry into an >> update of RFC 5245 without forcing it to be recycled as proposed. > This is a good reason, so I'll agree with it. Ok >>> Your registry description does not mention what is the precise name of >>> the registry. While everybody understands that is sands for ICE >>> options, it would be useful to give IANA distinctive guidelines on its >>> name (this is also required in RFC5226, Section 4.2, 1) in the list; >>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5226#section-4.2). >> >> Yes, I agree that it should be included in Section 3.1 of our document >> rather than only in the title which says "Interactive Connectivity >> Establishment (ICE) Options" > Agreed on this. Such name is fine, IMO. Ok >>> From RFC 5226, also Section 4.2: >>> >>>> 5) Initial assignments and reservations. Clear instructions >>>> should be provided to identify any initial assignments or >>>> registrations. In addition, any ranges that are to be reserved >>>> for "Private Use", "Reserved", "Unassigned", etc. should be >>>> clearly indicated. >>> Are there any initial assignments? Your document mentions one option; >>> shouldn't it be registered? >> No, because when draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-ecn gets published that will >> actually do the registration. As that document isn't approved yet and in >> fact still not WG last called this registry will first be created empty >> and then populated. > So you should have mentioned this in the draft as well. Ok, will clarify. >>>> A registration request MUST include the following information: >>>> >>>> [ . . . ] >>> Shall this be mentioned as a registration template? >> It isn't written as one. It is a list of what needs to be present in the >> registration. And I think a template would be more focused on what needs >> to the general categories rather than the information. Thus I don't want >> this as registration template. > OK, this matter is not very important. >>>> o Email and Address of the Contact person >>> I think you should add the name of the contact person to the name of >>> this field as well. >> As the two first bullets are: >> >> o Name of contact person for the registration >> >> o Email and Address of the Contact person >> >> I don't quite understand your comment. Do you want us to merge the two >> entries? This as the contact persons will need to provide name, email >> and address. I am fine with merging them and this is likely a slight >> improvement. > No, I didn't propose to merge it. I just proposed to rename this field > as "Name, Email and Addresses of the Contact Person". I think it is logical to have only one entry saying: "Name, Email and Addresses of the Contact Person for the registration" Cheers 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: magnus.westerlund@xxxxxxxxxxxx ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf