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-payload-vp8-08 Reviewer: Elwyn Davies Review Date: 7 June 2013 IETF LC End Date: 18 June 2013 IESG Telechat date: (if known) - Summary: Almost ready. Needs to specify the format of all the integer fields - a generic statement that 'all integer fields in the specifications are encoded as unsigned integers in network octet order' will solve this. There is a rather awkquard downref to the VP8 coded data format RFC 6386 - take advice from your AD on this one. Check that the media type registration is OK with the updated BCP (RFC 6838) Major issues: Minor issues: Nits/editorial comments: General: Consistent use of octets instead of bytes. s4: I suspect that usage of RTP/AVPF is an upper case RECOMMENDED. A brief explanation of *why* the usage of RTP/AVPF is RECOMMENDED would be helpful. s4.1: The formats for the Timestamp and Sequence Number fields are not specified (presumably unsigned integers in network octet order). s4.2: The formats for PartID, PictureID, TL0PICIDX, TID, and KEYIDX are not specified(presumably unsigned integers in network octet order). s4.2, Y bit: s/an change/a change/; s/rfc 6386/[RFC6386]/ s4.3, SizeN: s/The size of the first partition size/The size of the first partition/ s4.3: SizeN and VER need formats. s5.2: First, Number and (possibly) PictureID need formats. s6.2.2: s/will need a mean/will need a means/ s10: Are all of the refs normative? If so change the section title. The only one which I am dubious about is RFC 4566 (and there is 6386 - see next comment). s10: id nits complains that RFC 3894 is not referenced, RFC 4288 is obsoleted by 6838 (need to check your media type registration against the updated BCP) and RFC 6386 is a downref (you had better ask your AD about this downref - it is fairly fundamental!)