[rtcweb] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18: (with COMMENT)
Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net> Mon, 24 April 2017 12:07 UTC
Return-Path: <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD87112EC70; Mon, 24 Apr 2017 05:07:44 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview@ietf.org, Sean Turner <sean@sn3rd.com>, rtcweb-chairs@ietf.org, sean@sn3rd.com, rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.50.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <149303566483.25889.317046108892686691.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 05:07:44 -0700
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/G5yJx5R9FQCiTi2yuoeAQQwxgGQ>
Subject: [rtcweb] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Mon, 24 Apr 2017 12:07:45 -0000
Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18: 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-overview/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- One high level comments on normative language: While I think this document is very useful to explain the relationship between the other webrtc documents and serves a a good starting point for an implementor, I'm not sure if the use of normative language is actually helpful. Most of the language is used to say that a webrtc endpoint MUST implement a certain other document. However, I believe this is inherently necessary to achieve interoperability. So I don't see a need to specify this normatively. In regard to the shepherd write-up, I just want to note that using normative language does not automatically make the document Standards Track; there are many informational docs that use normative language. As such, I don't want raise a big discussion on status now, but this document sounds more informational to me (giving pointers to other document). However, I don't object to publication on Standards Track. minor comments: 1) I would not need all the text on the history of Internet communication in this doc (especially all text on page 3 in the intro as well as section 2.3 and the second to last paragraph in 3)... however, I guess it doesn't hurt 2) Agree with Warren that 'Protocol' probably doesn't need to be (re)defined in this doc 3) section 3: "Data transport: TCP, UDP and the means to securely set up connections between entities, as well as the functions for deciding when to send data: Congestion management, bandwidth estimation and so on." This seems to implicitly assume that only TCP or something encapsulated over UDP can be used. Even though that might be true, I assume this was not intentionally, maybe: NEW "Data transport: such as TCP or UDP and the means to securely set up connections between entities, as well as the functions for deciding when to send data: Congestion management, bandwidth estimation and so on." nit: -"massage the signals": not sure if "massage" is actually a meaningful word here…
- [rtcweb] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-… Mirja Kühlewind
- Re: [rtcweb] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dr… Ben Campbell
- Re: [rtcweb] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on dr… Sean Turner