Subject: [rtcweb] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-15: (with COMMENT)
From: "Mirja Kuehlewind" <[email-masked]>
To: "The IESG" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2016 06:58:22 -0700
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-rtcweb-transports-15: 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-rtcweb-transports/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for updating!

Leaving it to this comment:
Based on the TSV review I agree that this document (named "Transports for
WebRTC") should say more about congestion control. The TSV reviewer
(Thanks Allison!) proposes to refer
draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-circuit-breakers-17 and
draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements-09. I would even appreciate to have a 
sentence that says that congestion control and a circuit breaker is
mandated in draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-26.