Re: [MMUSIC] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-mmusic-dtls-sdp-28: (with COMMENT) - All comments should now have been addressed

["Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <[e-mail]>]

It's been on my list to go and read all of this but hope to email comments in early Sept. 

> On Aug 30, 2017, at 12:32 PM, Flemming Andreasen (fandreas) <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 8/30/17 3:27 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
>>> On Aug 30, 2017, at 1:03 PM, Adam Roach <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 8/30/17 04:31, Christer Holmberg wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> 
>>>> I have updated the PR. It should now address the IESG comments given by
>>>> Adam, Ekr, Alexey and Mirja.
>>>> 
>>>> https://github.com/cdh4u/draft-dtls-sdp/pull/35
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> In the latest commit (#7):
>>>> 
>>>> - Section 7 (Transport Protocol Considerations) was removed.
>>>> - Text regarding correlation of SDP and TLS connection was added to the
>>>> Security Considerations (as requested by Mirja).
>>>> 
>>>> Please let me know if there is something I¹ve forgot.
>>> The list of issues I posted to MMUSIC included the question about whether ufrag change requires a DTLS restart in the absence of a 'tls-id'. There was a bit of discussion on that list which seemed to conclude that it should *not*. I believe the document needs to reflect this -- but I'd specifically ask the MMUSIC chairs whether they see consensus on this point first.
>> I concur.
>> 
>> Chairs, what do you think?
> I would like to hear from a few more people first (and in particular some of the traditional stakeholders such as EKR, Cullen and Justin).
> 
> Thanks
> 
> -- Flemming (as MMUSIC co-chair)
> 
> 
>>> On the topic of looking over your changes: it's still easier to read a text-form document than digging through XML source. Version numbers are free. I encourage you to drop a new version whenever you ask people to look at changes.
>> I agree here, too. Christer, can you submit a revision with the changes so far?
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> 
>> Ben..