[rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-12

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Thu, 16 January 2014 14:03 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1EB7E1AE2CF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:03:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 RWK9Pjm-Wa71 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:03:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sesbmg20.ericsson.net (sesbmg20.ericsson.net [193.180.251.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A65E1AE2CB for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:03:37 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb38-b7f2c8e000006d25-63-52d7e6acdb7b
Received: from ESESSHC023.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.124]) by sesbmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id AE.ED.27941.CA6E7D25; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 15:03:24 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.89) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.347.0; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 15:03:24 +0100
Message-ID: <52D7E69C.2000405@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 15:03:08 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements@tools.ietf.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFnrDJMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvje6aZ9eDDPpPylpsvjmJ0WLtv3Z2 ByaPJUt+Mnl8ufyZLYApissmJTUnsyy1SN8ugStj18f5TAWb+So+/UpuYDzC3cXIySEhYCKx cnsDM4QtJnHh3no2EFtI4AijxNeHQDYXkL2cUWLu5G0sIAleAW2JJc9ugzWwCKhKHH9xgh3E ZhOwkLj5oxGsWVQgWOLWtAfsEPWCEidnPmEBGSQisIJRYsOUt2AJYQEXib3TtwIlOIA2i0v0 NAaBhJkF9CSmXG1hhLDlJZq3zmaGOEhboqGpg3UCI/8sJGNnIWmZhaRlASPzKkaO4tTipNx0 I4NNjMAQO7jlt8UOxst/bQ4xSnOwKInzfnzrHCQkkJ5YkpqdmlqQWhRfVJqTWnyIkYmDU6qB cULOhW/yi3ewTXjTpsh0xEvZ8Fiv6v1VMrcdxXYYcsp4e5ilJK4+vvZk9J9N98P63jB3Tf3n dP++S5NTLpPaOdu983v8Dxwv7uuI3fBtn5RDrp187C4f/bZ3l5Snp0ZlLw+6z/RxoXHrCZ2d kw4+KLxl9t/i17WJl0Or31z/nbX4xnLuwvLbq5RYijMSDbWYi4oTAUBZevn/AQAA
Subject: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-ietf-rtcweb-use-cases-and-requirements-12
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 14:03:39 -0000

Hi,

As part of preparing the Doc shepherd write-up I have reviewed the draft
and have the following comments and suggestions for improvements.
I have to note that I found violations of formal requirements in this
documents. So these are all suggestions for improvements.


1. After the WG last call this draft implemented half of my suggestion
of making clear what additional requirements use case resulted in.
However, it didn't implemented the part where I suggested that on the
first occurrence of a requirement, the full requirement text needs to be
included. I note that also Mary Barnes commented on the current format
making things hard to read.

2. Abstract:
Requirements on the browser functionality are derived from use-cases.

Shouldn't there be a "the" before use-cases in this sentence?

3. Section 3.3.8 title:

Simple Video Communication Service with sharing

Isn't simply having sharing in the title a bit unclear? Shouldn't this
be "Desktop" or "Application" sharing?

4. section 4.1:
   F26     It must be possible to move from one network
           interface to another one

I think it is unclear what shall move in this requirement. Wouln't it be
clearer to state this like this?

   F26     The communication session must survive across a change of the
network interface used by the session.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------