Re: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-02

Lars Eggert <> Fri, 30 September 2022 12:47 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6840CC14F74C; Fri, 30 Sep 2022 05:47:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uhLHPMEoHef7; Fri, 30 Sep 2022 05:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72ECCC14F747; Fri, 30 Sep 2022 05:47:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:96d:7258:2b5c:bed0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B2FA71DA025; Fri, 30 Sep 2022 15:47:00 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=dkim; t=1664542020; bh=35P8HJBK+lTP0ktNZJtme99Zr5yab3Jgg2FXZQojaJk=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=kYfSBEJIHJSi727+rxbM0sAnnsrYCnsz0e0ldJTq5TEUlBKQGX+HNfqvfH5vbfiaE qwt9qumPF860J21b7aIdDRIksk3GxVBJbBwl3wAI4HjKNbQiPmQg54Th+9lpUNCohV eWOD9+CosUJcs3vUBJf2xEM0mtHVXz+h0MRbZ46w=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_4DEE6948-795D-46A3-A08C-9EAFA9F9179A"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3696.\))
From: Lars Eggert <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 15:47:00 +0300
Cc: General Area Review Team <>,,,
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
To: Joel Halpern <>
X-MailScanner-ID: B2FA71DA025.A2B0F
X-MailScanner: Not scanned: please contact your Internet E-Mail Service Provider for details
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Genart last call review of draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 12:47:17 -0000

Joel, thank you for your review. I have entered a No Objection ballot for this document.


> On 2022-3-27, at 20:49, Joel Halpern via Datatracker <> wrote:
> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
> Review result: Ready with Issues
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
> <>.
> Document: draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-02
> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
> Review Date: 2022-03-27
> IETF LC End Date: 2022-04-05
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
> Summary: This document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard.
> However, there are some issues that should be considered before final approval.
> Major issues: None
> Minor issues:
>    I found myself confused as a reader about one aspect of this document  The
>    document seems to describe both the Interface to the JSEP and the details
>    of what the underlying system must do in response to JSEP operations.  The
>    later is described very well and clearly.  The former is described quite
>    vaguely.  I suspect that the assumption is that the required parameters are
>    described in the W3C documents.  But it is hard to tell, and the only
>    formal reference is a vague citation in the introduction to an outdated W3C
>    specification.  A little more clarity on how an implementor is supposed to
>    know what actual interface objects, methods, and parameters they need to
>    provide would be helpful.  Also, the reference should be updated to
>    whatever is the current W3C specification.
> Nits/editorial comments:
> --
> last-call mailing list