draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis has currently an overall page count of 214 pages

(http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis-15.txt)

and I doubt that many people have read the draft in the past as a whole...

After considering which part of the draft could shorten or moved to a different draft, I have have ended up with this as my personal conclusion:

Appendix B "Media Transport Alternatives" and Appendix C "Use of SDP for RTSP..." could be moved in separate drafts, as both are not necessarily part of RTSP itself, even though there somewhat required for operating RTSP.  However, this "required for operating RTSP" holds true in some environments, but not in all. For instance, in DVB network RTP is probably not used, but MPEG-2 TS. Same for SDP, as some might use it, some might not. 

Appendix B could be moved to a draft "Using RTSP with RTP as media transport" and Appendix C "SDP usage in RTSP" (titles are just suggestions!)

This would reduce the size of the draft, but, even more important, would clearly separate between the RTSP protocol and further protocols required by some architecture to build media delivery platforms. 

Any thoughts, suggestions, objections?

Thanks,

  Martin (draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc2326bis editor)