|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
RFC - Proposed Standard - Errata exist; obsoletes RFC2038.
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
This specification defines RTP payload format for MPEG1/MPEG2 video widely used in the world, and constitutes an essential part of the Recommendation.
Since this specification consists of huge number of pages, making reference saves a lot of paper in the printing process.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=2250
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 2250 was published in January 1998 and is a standards track RFC.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 2250 was published in January 1998 and is a standards track RFC. Errata exist; obsoletes RFC2038
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
RFC 2250 is referenced in H.225.0.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[1] ISO/IEC International Standard 11172; "Coding of moving pictures and associated audio for digital storage media up to about 1.5 Mbit/s", November 1993./
[2] ISO/IEC International Standard 13818; "Generic coding of moving pictures and associated audio information", November 1994./
[3] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", RFC 1889, January 1996. /
[4] Schulzrinne, H., "RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control", RFC 1890, January 1996./
[5] Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", STD 5, RFC 1112, August 1989.
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
References should always be made to RFC numbers (and not by other designations such as STD, BCP, etc.). References not to be made to documents referred to as "Internet Drafts" or RFCs categorized as "Historic". Normative references should not be made to RFCs that are not standards, for example, "Informational" and "Experimental" RFCs.
|
