[rmcat] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria-12: (with COMMENT)
Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Mon, 02 March 2020 13:41 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: rmcat@ietf.org
Delivered-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5EAC3A0BFA; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 05:41:22 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Éric Vyncke via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria@ietf.org, rmcat-chairs@ietf.org, rmcat@ietf.org, Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>, varun.singh@iki.fi, csp@csperkins.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.119.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Éric Vyncke <evyncke@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <158315648292.27434.4369140742681036338@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 05:41:22 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rmcat/58wf7O-jIWHzZFt-dZWir4D2aMQ>
Subject: [rmcat] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria-12: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: rmcat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
List-Id: "RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques \(RMCAT\) Working Group discussion list." <rmcat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rmcat/>
List-Post: <mailto:rmcat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2020 13:41:23 -0000
Éric Vyncke has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria-12: 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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for the work put into this document. It is indeed important to be able to compare apples with apples. I have a generic comment, is the case of multi-path / multi-home considered in this document ? Nevertheless, please find below some non-blocking COMMENTs (and I would appreciate a response from the authors) and NITS. I hope that this helps to improve the document, Regards, -éric == COMMENTS == -- Section 3 -- Please add references to PCAP format and expand the acronym. -- Section 3.1 -- AFAIK, Unix timestamps have a 1-second accuracy but this document requires an accurancy of 200 msec. Is it expected that Unix timestamp are enough ? == NITS == -- Section 2 -- The sentence "The terminology defined ..." is not a sentence as there is no verb :-)
- [rmcat] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-ietf-… Éric Vyncke via Datatracker
- Re: [rmcat] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-i… Joerg Ott
- Re: [rmcat] Éric Vyncke's No Objection on draft-i… Eric Vyncke (evyncke)