[rtcweb] Zaheduzzaman Sarker's No Objection on draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-03: (with COMMENT)

[Zaheduzzaman Sarker via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Zaheduzzaman Sarker has entered the following ballot position for
draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-03: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ 
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis/



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

Thanks for the updated specification and finding a way solve the issue with
minimal changes.

One comment -

  - if not MUST, I was at least expecting a normative SHOULD to use the
  must-bundle policy instead of max-bundle in the following text-

     "As a result, "max-bundle" is considered deprecated, and new applications
     should use the "must-bundle" policy instead."