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-mmusic-sdp-g723-g729-04.txt Reviewer: Francis Dupont Review Date: 20131120 IETF LC End Date: 20131127 IESG Telechat date: unknown Summary: Ready Major issues: None Minor issues: None Nits/editorial comments: - Abstract page 1: usually the Abstract should not reference an RFC by its number. IMHO here it is the exception: the I-D will be included into the next revision of the RFC. - I don't like the annexa/annexb name (nor my spell checker) but they are the names used by the RFC... - ToC page 2 and 7 page 7: Acknowledgement -> Acknowledgment - 1 page 3 (wording suggestion): implied if -> implied when - 1 page 3: BTW IMHO "use or preferred" should be interpreted as preferred in the offer and use in the answer so the RFC is correct. But as you mentioned some implementations didn't follow the interpretation so I understand why a clarification new document (this I-D) is needed. And of course I fully agree with 3.1 and 3.2. - 7 page 7: Note I checked the spelling of "Harprit S. Chhatwal (InnoMedia)" (uncommon for our eyes but correct). Regards Francis.Dupont at fdupont.fr