[tsvwg] Ben Campbell's Discuss on draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-09: (with DISCUSS)

[Ben Campbell <[e-mail]>]

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb-09: Discuss

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/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-le-phb/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks for this effort. The draft appears to be in good shape overall; I just
have one process point I would like to DISCUSS before approval:

Section 12 appears to be an update to draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos, which is
currently in the RFC Editor queue in the MISSREF state. It's not clear to me
what the intent of this section is, but if the idea is to formally update a
_draft_, then please do not do that. The right way to proceed would be to pull
draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos from the RFC editor queue and make the changes
there.

The UPDATES relationship is intended for updating RFCs, which are otherwise
immutable. Drafts, even post-IESG approval and in the RFC editor queue can
still be changed. Making readers figure out the update between two different
RFCs when there is an option to just fix the draft would be a disservice to
readers.