|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
Approved
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
This specification defines RTP payload format for H.264 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=3984
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 3984 has been in existence since 2005. This text is a Proposed Standard. This document has been reviewed extensively in IETF.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
RFC is a standards-track document and is currently in the "Proposed Standard" state. Current standards status of this document can be found at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/std/std1.txt
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
H.241 defines the procedures for use of advanced video codecs, including Rec. H.264, with H.300 series terminals.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[1] ITU-T Recommendation H.264, "Advanced video coding for generic audiovisual services", May 2003./
[2] ISO/IEC International Standard 14496-10:2003./
[3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997./
[4] Schulzrinne, H., Casner, S., Frederick, R., and V. Jacobson, "RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications", STD 64, RFC 3550, July 2003./
[5] Handley, M. and V. Jacobson, "SDP: Session Description Protocol", RFC 2327, April 1998./
[6] Josefsson, S., "The Base16, Base32, and Base64 Data Encodings", RFC 3548, July 2003./
[7] Rosenberg, J. and H. Schulzrinne, "An Offer/Answer Model with Session Description Protocol (SDP)", RFC 3264, June 2002.
|
|
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.
|
