[AVTCORE] Martin Duke's No Objection on draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-scip-09: (with COMMENT)

[Martin Duke via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Martin Duke has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-scip-09: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-scip/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks to Olivier Bonaventure for the TSVART review.

Sorry for the delay in my review. I have two comments:

(4) Fig. 2 implies that both Codec output and control messages can be sent
unencrypted. Is that the intent?

(4.2) Thanks for all the work on improving the congestion control section. As
this document is focused on network interaction with SCIP, it would be useful
to explain exactly what forms of network feedback will be consumed by SCIP
congestion control or ABR. e.g. I assume packet drops are successful in getting
SCIP to back off. But what about delay signals? ECN?