Re: [rtcweb] AD evaluation: draft-ietf-rtcweb-video-05

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Tue, 09 June 2015 21:04 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 CFD031A026C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 14:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 KV6A6Fd9tdZG for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 14:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 E5CD91A0127 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Jun 2015 14:04:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Orochi.local (99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.1/8.14.9) with ESMTPSA id t59L4aHR060126 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Jun 2015 16:04:36 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host 99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110] claimed to be Orochi.local
Message-ID: <557754E4.6010806@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 16:04:36 -0500
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <C6DAACC5-0FCA-48BB-A2BA-D3E0EE35DEF4@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <C6DAACC5-0FCA-48BB-A2BA-D3E0EE35DEF4@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/vIiyaR7D9eUFLGjBENFmjqCCUeY>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] AD evaluation: draft-ietf-rtcweb-video-05
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: Tue, 09 Jun 2015 21:04:41 -0000

On 5/13/15 19:18, Alissa Cooper wrote:
> Reading Section 7, it strikes me that a question may arise during IETF LC or IESG eval about whether there is any plan to write something similar to RFC 6562 for video. Has that been discussed?

Not really. Magnus had concerns that 6562 wasn't an appropriate citation 
for video, so I shortened it to a brief description of the issue. I 
would be happy if a more rigorous treatment were written, but I'm not a 
likely candidate to author it.


> s/what the other documents it references/what is in the other documents it references/
>
> s/A complete discussion of the security/A complete discussion of the security considerations/
>
> And in Section 10.1:
> The URL given for H264 links to a seemingly blank page.
>

Thanks. Good catches, will be fixed in the final version.

/a