[Fecframe] Request for Publication: draft-ietf-fecframe-interleaved-fec-scheme-05

[Greg Shepherd <gjshep at gmail.com>]

*,

draft-ietf-fecframe-interleaved-fec-scheme-05 is ready for
publication. The document shepherd write-up is included here.

Thanks,
Greg
---

Document Shepherd Wriite-up for draft-ietf-fecframe-interleaved-fec-scheme-05

1.a) The Document Shepherd is Greg Shepherd

1.b) The document has had adequate review both from within and from
outside the FECFrame working group.

1.c) There are no concerns regarding the need for additional expanded review.

1.d) There are no specific concerns with this document

1.e) There is solid WG consensus for this document.

1.f) There is no discontent.

1.g) The idnits are minor and I don't feel warrant a rev of the
document and the associated process. I believe we should handle the
edits as publication notes. The relevant nit output being:

** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3555 (Obsoleted by RFC 4855, RFC 4856)

 The normative reference to RFC 3555 should be updated to RFC 4855,
RFC 4856 as suggested.

There is a reference to draft-ietf-fecframe-dvb-al-fec-01 though the
latest rev of that draft is 03. This will be updated before
publication with the correct RFC number.

The other nit issues regarding informational references to RFC 2733
and RFC 3009 can be ignored as these obsolete references are
intentional.


1.h) All references are split between normative and informative. There
is one informative reference to a draft in the FECFrame WG that is
also in the process of progressing to last-call:
draft-ietf-fecframe-dvb-al-fec

1.i) The IANA consideration section exists and is consistent with the
body of the document. The required IANA registries are clearly defined
in the document.

1.j) The xml code validates correctly

1.k)

Technical Summary
	This document defines a new RTP payload format for the Forward Error
Correction that is generated by the 1-D interleaved parity code from a
source media encapsulated in RTP. The 1-D interleaved parity code is a
systematic code, where a number of repair symbols are generated from a
set of source symbols and sent in a repair flow separate from the
source flow that carries the source symbols. The new payload format
defined in this document is used (with some exceptions) as part of the
DVB Application-layer FEC specification.

Working Group Summary
	There were no seriously contentious issues during the WG process. The
only controversy stemmed from some individuals who did the work in
SMPTE and didn't want the IETF redefining their work. But the problem
is that RFC 2733 did not protect some fields in the header and SMPTE
was based on RFC 2733. SMTPE spec also made mistakes with SSRC, CSRC
and timestamps which are corrected in this document. Additionally, RTP
validity checks fail in RPF 2733/SMTPE specs.

Document Quality
	Current implementations follow SMTPE and not yet this specification.

Personal
	Document Shepherd - Greg Shepherd
	Responsible Area Director - TBD

Document Shepherd Wriite-up for draft-ietf-fecframe-interleaved-fec-scheme-05

1.a) The Document Shepherd is Greg Shepherd

1.b) The document has had adequate review both from within and from outside the FECFrame working group.

1.c) There are no concerns regarding the need for additional expanded review.

1.d) There are no specific concerns with this document

1.e) There is solid WG consensus for this document.

1.f) There is no discontent.

1.g) The idnits are minor and I don't feel warrant a rev of the document and the associated process. I believe we should handle the edits as publication notes. The relevant nit output being:

** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3555 (Obsoleted by RFC 4855, RFC 4856)

 The normative reference to RFC 3555 should be updated to RFC 4855, RFC 4856 as suggested. 

There is a reference to draft-ietf-fecframe-dvb-al-fec-01 though the latest rev of that draft is 03. This will be updated before publication with the correct RFC number.

The other nit issues regarding informational references to RFC 2733 and RFC 3009 can be ignored as these obsolete references are intentional.


1.h) All references are split between normative and informative. There is one informative reference to a draft in the FECFrame WG that is also in the process of progressing to last-call:
draft-ietf-fecframe-dvb-al-fec

1.i) The IANA consideration section exists and is consistent with the body of the document. The required IANA registries are clearly defined in the document.

1.j) The xml code validates correctly

1.k)

Technical Summary
	This document defines a new RTP payload format for the Forward Error Correction that is generated by the 1-D interleaved parity code from a source media encapsulated in RTP. The 1-D interleaved parity code is a systematic code, where a number of repair symbols are generated from a set of source symbols and sent in a repair flow separate from the source flow that carries the source symbols. The new payload format defined in this document is used (with some exceptions) as part of the DVB Application-layer FEC specification.

Working Group Summary
	There were no seriously contentious issues during the WG process. The only controversy stemmed from some individuals who did the work in SMPTE and didn't want the IETF redefining their work. But the problem is that RFC 2733 did not protect some fields in the header and SMPTE was based on RFC 2733. SMTPE spec also made mistakes with SSRC, CSRC and timestamps which are corrected in this document. Additionally, RTP validity checks fail in RPF 2733/SMTPE specs.

Document Quality
	Current implementations follow SMTPE and not yet this specification.

Personal
	Document Shepherd - Greg Shepherd
	Responsible Area Director - TBD