Re: [rtcweb] AD review: draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Sat, 03 November 2018 22:33 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A59D4130DC3; Sat, 3 Nov 2018 15:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 z25XOayYVFCP; Sat, 3 Nov 2018 15:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 117B112F1A5; Sat, 3 Nov 2018 15:33:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-9bba.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-9bba.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.155.186]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id wA3MXFSO040783 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Sat, 3 Nov 2018 17:33:17 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Cc: draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling.all@ietf.org, RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
References: <773c8e91-a1d2-8c9e-fd19-c8b181f6dad1@nostrum.com> <CAOJ7v-0k1v5gLduSy3Z_xf-Cmu7PR=QWvUMjugPi3p5HrtL2pw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-1tZuniuTwk+573r_wxmzfssJihUEyNL8QGwMR6f4U3hQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
Message-ID: <c9350e51-34de-742f-11e1-730400a53a7e@nostrum.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2018 05:33:14 +0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-1tZuniuTwk+573r_wxmzfssJihUEyNL8QGwMR6f4U3hQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------4ACB752FA543771CE813C4A4"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/55RNgg41xLmMBLb8tdAjfmkX2kg>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] AD review: draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2018 22:33:33 -0000

Thanks for the fast turn-around!

/a

On 11/4/18 00:24, Justin Uberti wrote:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-11
>
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 9:35 AM Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com 
> <mailto:juberti@google.com>> wrote:
>
>     See https://github.com/rtcweb-wg/ip-handling/pull/1
>
>     Will send out a new version of the doc when the upload tool reopens.
>
>     On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 6:15 PM Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com
>     <mailto:adam@nostrum.com>> wrote:
>
>         This is my AD review for draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling.
>
>         I think this document is ready to go into IETF last call,
>         modulo the ICE
>         citation issue. I plan to issue last call for this document at
>         the same time
>         as draft-ietf-rtcweb-security-arch and
>         draft-ietf-rtcweb-security, so it
>         will
>         wait for those to become ready.
>
>         I'm marking the document as "revised ID needed" pending the
>         ICE reference
>         update.
>
>         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>         [DISCUSS]
>
>         Per the discussion around Cluster 238 dependencies, please
>         reference RFC
>         8445
>         instead of RFC 5245.
>
>         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>         §2:
>
>         Please update to match the RFC 8174 boilerplate.
>
>         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>         §5.2:
>
>          >  Future versions of this document may define additional
>         modes and/or
>          >  update the recommended default modes.
>
>         Suggest: "Future documents may...", as future consensus may be
>         to update
>         rather
>         than replace this document.
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         rtcweb mailing list
>         rtcweb@ietf.org <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>