Re: [rtcweb] AD Evaluation of draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis
Justin Uberti <juberti@alphaexplorationco.com> Tue, 15 March 2022 19:01 UTC
Return-Path: <juberti@alphaexplorationco.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 154FB3A1888 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:01:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.107
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.107 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=alphaexplorationco.com
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 iIgPqPR2JIYV for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ot1-x336.google.com (mail-ot1-x336.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::336]) (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 883FD3A18F2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ot1-x336.google.com with SMTP id w17-20020a056830111100b005b22c584b93so14584206otq.11 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:01:20 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alphaexplorationco.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZugpU6tiCeeLGc3Nksr/ssmn5UXZ/cnYVeBmNa2ZE20=; b=A/N+79QZVPDYklixXzkM2oXrdqLlQ6gzsxWt4NB/FFlIFUGAeSEPqS6mPqmQl3lmM+ DWBv58T+/lCPjCHFVZ5SHVCOTwzvmv2DNUCVbZ5Au0MV3ADkgOgRjSYTVoQ5cxIX7Zz7 Aqk362aRnAWK4LeLNldxRHGoEMH0lKEXVULdRS5c8hgz+5icZLgbs/X06Zz5Y8/Klv1W vj/mtWZvQiHDL3eVKnhL3iMn/8eYx8CZs6+64tdgzIKBi6KF+AKIZ1Szd/am659JZ29Z SM/CrfNdchDRrGNFzvx8DUOiMnkxErAYX+Y5s0F7xzzmKRR2zNHJxSj1ap+SYeC8B92O XO0w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZugpU6tiCeeLGc3Nksr/ssmn5UXZ/cnYVeBmNa2ZE20=; b=AWwkmZDkY23FBMiZ6g46+EoV/RR3ibSaUiJWyrSbRQU8tmwEV8/y6cKQcMD8A4jFPu w2UoTfdVXh69rGfv15P7lTTSMFHn+5NCzfX+SuSKCnfv7FDlFxVpaUtbq3K7poadPvKB uf6pq8+Iyb3hJnQR5W2I/eK9I6gXQ+7tl+ix08rarYep02efl+XCf1Lk/yFQqpC39wrw KgJ/6ED08AKw+VY2ser2dYVYKSvYOgiFxoVFwmWzmGPa/EjG9jxL/5tlfgZ/UN9gQBPP +BW5d5rnSy9sI11LYHQfNkhXUn4mPeShhv6YYhHAvBmBh5SC5gxDXU0mJ/dpE93x4C5c TQtg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531r5CBL9TRrCXMHreE15C9kklJK8bWj2eFrLuGsQFnfJTdju7te LX4MVNloPCjacpNVY6gssBf8R2ymrN8XNc2dlontIw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyK3VDSP85c0P32ABDPSLGbTLNYHVSGGjkfPOBGyOVAhulfl5KNtZsPJ0Sdi+pCANPX6eUE3grg6lWs0eD9DX8=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7687:0:b0:59e:da8c:5d32 with SMTP id j7-20020a9d7687000000b0059eda8c5d32mr12857071otl.77.1647370879251; Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:01:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAL0qLwYaeiG1dk_3eCDdPyWxoLZ8tvc_5hpvf7UMT62hFng0dw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYaeiG1dk_3eCDdPyWxoLZ8tvc_5hpvf7UMT62hFng0dw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Justin Uberti <juberti@alphaexplorationco.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 12:01:08 -0700
Message-ID: <CAOLzse3A22=XgMdiQLoLe=+NcgDXAYVfqvb3XCZy2fY_8xBxdg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Cc: RTCWeb IETF <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000012488305da466c8b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/In-ql5srcsmA30y0cHTG8kB94Lk>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] AD Evaluation of draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis
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: Tue, 15 Mar 2022 19:01:46 -0000
Good catch. This was probably caused by the search-and-replace we did when publishing this draft, we can fix it with any other feedback as you mentioned. On Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 9:12 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, thanks for getting this moving. I'm just looking at the diff between > this and RFC 8829 for this review. There's only one small thing, so I'm > also going to request Last Call now, and we can resolve these points along > with any other Last Call feedback you get. > > Section 1.3 says: > > When [RFC8829 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8829>] was published, inconsistencies regarding BUNDLE > [RFC9143 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9143>] operation were identified with regard to both the > specification text as well as implementation behavior. The former > concern was addressed via an update to [RFC9143 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc9143>]. For the latter > concern, it was observed that some implementations implemented the > "max-bundle" bundle policy defined in [RFC8829 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8829>] by assuming that > bundling had already been negotiated, rather than marking "m=" > sections as bundle-only as indicated by the specification. In order > to prevent unexpected changes to applications relying on the pre- > standard behavior, the decision was made to deprecate "max-bundle" > and instead introduce an identically defined "must-bundle" policy > that, when selected, provides the behavior originally specified by > [RFC8829 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8829>]. > > But RFC 9143 was the update, it's not the thing being updated. So I think > that second sentence needs to change to something like: > > "The former concern was addressed in RFC 9143, which obsoleted RFC 8843." > > -MSK > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb >
- [rtcweb] AD Evaluation of draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [rtcweb] AD Evaluation of draft-uberti-rtcweb… Justin Uberti