Subject: [siprec] Comments on draft-ietf-siprec-architecture-03

From: "Ram Mohan R (rmohanr)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:15:34 +0530

I reviewed draft-ietf-siprec-architecture-03 and the document looks
pretty good. Here are a few minor nits.

I see that this draft uses Media Recording Metadata(MRM) to talk about
metadata. Note that neither the requirement rfc or metadata draft uses
this terminology for metadata. Is it better to change it to just
Recording metadata to keep it consistent ?

Section 1 ( Introduction) has
" The Replicated
   Media is required to be sent in real-time to the Session Recording
   Server and is not buffered by the Session Recording Client to allow
   for real-time analysis of the media by the Session Recording Server" 

This is more of a requirement and I see no need to have this text in
architecture document. In case we still need to give guideless on how to
do this, the solution draft can talk about it.

In figure 4 the direction of RTP/RTCP arrow towards SRS should be
reverse.

In figure 5, the Focus/SRC may also record the mixed stream. Should we
show that also in figure ?

Section 3.2.1 to 3.2.3 talks about how an SRC should setup a session,
what parameters to include e.t.c. I wonder if this should be part of
protocol document ?

Ram

---

From: Leon Portman <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:11:29 +0200

Thank you very much Ram

Lets hear some opinions and i will update the document

Regards

Leon

On Oct 19, 2011, at 11:45 AM, Ram Mohan R (rmohanr) wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> siprec mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/siprec