Re: [tram] Stephen Farrell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tram-turn-third-party-authz-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Brandon Williams <[e-mail]>]

On 04/15/2015 12:06 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brandon Williams [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2015 6:36 PM
>>
>> On 04/10/2015 11:07 PM, Tirumaleswar Reddy (tireddy) wrote:
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Stephen Farrell [mailto:[e-mail]]
>>>> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2015 1:08 AM
>>>> - 9: Figure 2 should be way up at the top of the document and not
>>>> here
>>>
>>> In the previous versions it was in the top of the document but moved
>> down after comments received from the WG that WebRTC is only an
>> example usage of third party authorization.
>>
>> A few people from outside the WG have commented on having trouble
>> following the flow of the document on their first read, primarily due to the
>> lack of a high-level picture early in the document. Moving section 9 back up
>> toward the top of the document would help by giving readers such a high-
>> level overview early on. The discussion might need to be generalized a bit in
>> order to serve this purpose, but comments we've received on the
>> document's usability indicate that this change would be helpful.
>
> Section 9 is specific to TURN and the ask from the WG is to discuss it in a separate section after third party authorization with STUN protocol is explained.

Enough people who were not actively involved in formulation of the draft 
have commented on understandability issues that I think it would be good 
to make some effort in that area. If section 9 cannot be generalized and 
moved earlier in the document as a way to help readers from outside the 
WG understand the context, then I think something else probably still 
needs to be done.

--Brandon

-- 
Brandon Williams; Chief Architect
Cloud Networking; Akamai Technologies Inc.