Re: [xrblock] WGLC for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics

Fine with me.
Colin

> On 21 Mar 2016, at 17:57, Varun Singh <vsingh.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Colin,
> 
> Apologies for the delay, my proposal is the following:
> 
> 
>   In this document, we provide rationale for choosing additional RTP
>   metrics for the WebRTC getStats() API [W3C.WD-webrtc-20150210].  The
>   document also creates a registry containing identifiers from the
>   metrics reported in the RTCP Sender, Receiver, and Extended Reports.
>   All identifiers proposed in this document are RECOMMENDED to be
>   implemented by an endpoint.  An endpoint MAY choose not to expose an
>   identifier if it does not implement the corresponding RTCP Report.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> wrote:
>> On 20 Jan 2016, at 04:31, Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com> wrote:
>> 
>> This message starts a Working Group Last Call for the
>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-02.txt.
>> 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-02.txt
>> 
>> Even if you have no questions, comments or concern, if you have read the
>> draft and agree that it’s ready for submission to IESG as a Standard Track,
>> please send a message to the list indicating this.
>> 
>> Obviously if you have any issues or questions please submit it to the list,
>> if you are highlighting issues suggestions to fix the issues is always
>> helpful.
>> 
>> 
>> I have two comments:
>> 
>> 1) The draft uses RFC 2119 terms in lower case in a number of places. I
>> think it would be clearer if these were changed to upper case where the
>> intent is to use normative language, and rephrased to use alternative terms
>> otherwise.
>> 
>> 2) The draft has a reasonable list of candidate metrics, but does not make a
>> clear recommendation which metrics ought to be implemented. Is the intent
>> that a WebRTC end-point implementor picks an arbitrary subset of these, or
>> that all the metrics are implemented? If a subset is to be implemented,
>> which subset? What are the most important to implement? Adding some further
>> normative language would probably help clarify.
>> 
>> That said, I have no objection to sending this draft to the IESG for
>> publication. It suggests a reasonable set of metrics, and is well enough
>> written.
>> 
>> --
>> Colin Perkins
>> https://csperkins.org/
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> xrblock mailing list
>> xrblock@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> http://www.callstats.io

-- 
Colin Perkins
https://csperkins.org/