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

[Erik Kline via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Erik Kline 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:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

# Internet AD comments for {draft-uberti-rtcweb-rfc8829bis-03}
CC @ekline

## Comments

### general

* Is there a reason this didn't get renamed with -ietf-?
  I see a working group adoption event in the history.
  Not important, just curious.

### S5.2.1, S5.3.1

* RFC 8840 Section 4.1.1 says that either 0.0.0.0 or :: may be used.  This
  section says that "c=" MUST use 0.0.0.0.  Can :: be used instead?

* Ditto for the Initial Answers discussion (and 8440 S4.1.3), pp. 53, 55.