Telechat Review of draft-ietf-codec-guidelines-
review-ietf-codec-guidelines-genart-telechat-thomson-2011-11-30-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-codec-guidelines
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Telechat Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2011-11-17
Requested 2011-11-03
Authors Jean-Marc Valin, Slava Borilin, Koen Vos, Christopher Montgomery, Juin-Hwey Chen
Draft last updated 2011-11-30
Completed reviews Genart Telechat review of -?? by Martin Thomson
Genart Telechat review of -?? by Martin Thomson
Secdir Last Call review of -?? by Taylor Yu
Secdir Telechat review of -?? by Taylor Yu
Assignment Reviewer Martin Thomson
State Completed
Review review-ietf-codec-guidelines-genart-telechat-thomson-2011-11-30
Review completed: 2011-11-30

Review
review-ietf-codec-guidelines-genart-telechat-thomson-2011-11-30

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive.

Document: draft-ietf-codec-guidelines-05
Reviewer: Martin Thomson
Review Date: 2011-10-11
IETF LC End Date: 2011-10-19

Summary: This draft is basically ready for publication as an Informational RFC, but has nits that should be considered before publication.

Nits:

This document describes a process that seems to touch on points in 2026 and other BCPs.  It does not clearly identify whether this process is _different_, or whether the intent is to simply explain the application of the BCPs with codec-specific elaboration.  It would appear that it's the latter, but I'm far from expert in these matters.  A short statement identifying the which choice, and the intent of any differences (if any) would be helpful.

Nitty nits:
Missing citation for ITU-R BS.1534 (MUSHRA)
Missing expansion on first use of several acronyms (e.g., PESQ, PEAQ, and SegSNR)