Re: [rtcweb] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-21

Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> Fri, 01 September 2017 21:45 UTC

Return-Path: <juberti@google.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F278C13441A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:45:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JucA6pJ9Izmy for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:45:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x234.google.com (mail-it0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::234]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DFCD134655 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x234.google.com with SMTP id 77so2599298itj.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:45:56 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=EBLQDejeeN//rxjo72NRBeCJ1LSB5nfcRXnd717z79Q=; b=FrBToDt7tm9yABMT73NBd6bMDi1tfvo7XzrfLAuBFx0LDMAg8J1l39cejlGp/ion/q 1tsYYoVvFmFtaPbU/ho2lAfa/sCLo3YbWI/zmRlnnAEC1DbrASv/e3VBBazAGAuufLDT ZdZxfjXWO7WNMPDL7KEqTnPVQJCWOmhHUXwMIO/KmFQloSYhEJ2dlYXOg4sTHSuxp4K0 a5g+5AeMAC43ww+xXiZqsrpgHz8eNLuffMJTyk+ANxGV1po82IRndNYaGMuMEtlUcgML hVZ8IHsgvZJUqtg8uqUjSCwo/fsbUBA9eQr7i3bQBUI0372fipO+7Bbtucsva1IqpX13 E4RQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=EBLQDejeeN//rxjo72NRBeCJ1LSB5nfcRXnd717z79Q=; b=fWumnDs56t7C/UU2SJf8oMjCC3I8nA2SREe41gsnVzz4KA92uTTkqo5AwUPj99N1+r NeXvO5rqjBmn9JfuEt2B+4xgRQ9wo1qIwxVECYMrpB0PU5jX8bAvOnW68QC5t0cXaoxY wK6p7XClgKEhWOxkaWPofiPHYeheHtly2ZDsQgAGz0nZPxPiwe6JeQKMPmrSYjr3JpMa y/xhpV4C975K2RukGOZDMReHTgEbLmqGtarwEr5b/yQkIKx0sXN6DoZtc9eGvbSW3C6u 9y85LLCUdGT0/Hq2cwpTcDw7dan0S0Mg0Qx3MVhbzMV95DCgtuTiVqY/4qNi2ioVLjuV bBUg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUjn5WYNRK4ivJJ2ZAo9oREuwPH46u98/IHd2u67z6N4DLEiULuB 8EhpPuWPnoW9gFcoxEv/VPeDoVMKWifJ
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb7jAvnFFlS4qLq1VXOOwd0TIuY05/MkhL13OSZX5a7ML4jASlHrMwo1nao3o2iVWLXerCllky2k5rNZVT3XvPw=
X-Received: by 10.36.34.15 with SMTP id o15mr809279ito.133.1504302355684; Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:45:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.148.209 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Sep 2017 14:45:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <65A7933F-39BC-4E21-B5D2-9F9BB61B7ED7@iii.ca>
References: <150293290297.12432.15822575176336895893@ietfa.amsl.com> <65A7933F-39BC-4E21-B5D2-9F9BB61B7ED7@iii.ca>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2017 14:45:34 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOJ7v-3UnkZwjY4LyoWobJq9-9k6dB5d1t3O9MtJC=5PpX3fuA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep-21
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Cc: Carlos Martinez <carlosm3011@gmail.com>, draft-ietf-rtcweb-jsep.all@ietf.org, ops-dir@ietf.org, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113f741e8c3ff9055827af6a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/7CUSOWnK45L7WICuqyJ3uNzpjhc>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2017 21:46:00 -0000

Following up on this - we made some text changes in the -22 version of the
document that should address your comments. Thanks!

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 11:13 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:

>
> On Aug 16, 2017, at 6:21 PM, Carlos Martinez <carlosm3011@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Reviewer: Carlos Martinez
> Review result: Ready
>
> I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's
> ongoing
> effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
> comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects
> of
> the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be
> included
> in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs
> should
> treat these comments just like any other last call comments.
>
> Noting that I'm certainly not an expert on the subject matter, I've found
> this
> document to be READY. I found it well-written, it contains plenty of
> detailed
> examples (which I believe are really important for API and
> programming-heavy
> documents), and includes plenty of references as well.
>
> Please do not forget to remove "Appendix B.  Change log".
>
> A minor observation, not even a nit, is that the text in the Security
> Considerations "While formally the JSEP interface is an API, it is better
> to
> think of it is an Internet protocol, with the JS being untrustworthy from
> the
> perspective of the endpoint. " could be more clear.
>
> thanks!
>
> /Carlos
>
>
>
> Thanks Carlos, I'll have a look at the things you mention (
> https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/791 and https:/
> /github.com/rtcweb-wg/jsep/issues/792 for tracking )
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>