Hi Mark
>1) DVB agreed corrected schema yesterday, so you probably do
>not have the most up-to-date (but for reasons which are
>obscure to me they did not agree to align with 3GPP/IETF).
ok
>3) So you think the Standards Track docs should not even make
>*informative* references to the Experimental ones ? Even just
>to state that they are backwards compatible with them ? The
>reference would be in the "Informative References" section. I
>thought that the ban of referencing Experimental documents was
>for Normative References only ?
informational ref to EXP is ok in general. However, referencing a (soon
to be) obsolete version of the RMT RFC family seems strange when in 6
months (hopefully) the only FLUTE of interest will not be 3926. I think
"passing WGLC" will be enough justification for the alg in FEC-BB, it
does not need to justify itself. From experimental, an implementer will
see the block removed from standards track FLUTE and the ref to the new
FEC-BB so at no point will there need to be a reference back to EXP
FLUTE.
>4) The link between the OTI elements in the FDT and the OTI
>elements in the EXT-FTI is preserved in the sense that both
>FDT elements and EXT-FTI elements are defined (semantically)
>in the FEC BB - i.e. both FDT OTI and EXT-OTI point to FEC BB,
>rather than FDT OTI pointing to EXT-FTI.
ok - my full review of FEC-BB is even more nigh :)
Cheers, Rod.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.