Controlling Multiple Streams for Telepresence (CLUE) Protocol Data Channel
draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-18

A few nits:

(1) Section 1.  Typo (missing space).

s/[I-D.ietf-clue-protocol]messages/
[I-D.ietf-clue-protocol] messages/

(2) Section 1. Editorial Nit.

s/data channel Establishment Protocol/
Data Channel Establishment Protocol/

(3) Section 3.2.1, Typo

s/(e.g. regarding ordered delivery )/
(e.g., regarding ordered delivery)/

(4) Section 3.2.1.  Typo.  s/signalled/signaled/

(5) Section 3.2.3, Per “[I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] also mandates support of the limited retransmission policy defined in [RFC7496].”, I was expecting to read something about how this extension is also not needed by CLUE like the previous part of the paragraph.  Right now the text only states something about rtcweb but not CLUE.

While the I-D was waiting for missing references, RFC 2119 has been obsoleted by RFC 8174 => please update section 2.

It is unclear for me in section 3.2.7 whether the 'stream reset' actually refers to RFC 6525 "SSN reset". Looking forward to being enlighten on this point.

*Nits*

Section 3.2.2, I wonder whether the note is really required as it restates parts of another documents (even if it gives some more context as in other subsections of section 3.2).

Section 3.2.7 s/Close CLUE data channel/Closing the CLUE data channel/

Section 1

                                           This includes SCTP
   considerations specific to a CLUE data channel, the SDP Media
   Description (m- line) values, and usage of SDP attributes specific to
   a CLUE data channel.

nit: "m= line"

Section 2

Please use the RFC 8174 boilerplate.

Section 3.1

   the WebRTC data channel mechanism.  This includes a set of SCTP
   characteristics specific to a CLUE data channel, the values of the m-
   line describing the SCTPoDTLS association associated with the WebRTC

nit: "m= line"?

Section 3.2.7

   As described in [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol], in order to close a
   data channel, an entity sends an SCTP reset message [RFC6525] on its

This reference would normally make draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-protocol a
normative reference, but I think that perhaps the intended reference is
actually draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel (which is already a normative
reference).  In particular, Section 6.7 of the latter document is about
"Closing a Data Channel" and mentions resetting the streams.

Section 3.3.2

   The values of the SDP dcmap attribute
   [I-D.ietf-mmusic-data-channel-sdpneg], associated with the m- line

nit: "m= line"?

Section 5.1

I note that the WebSocket Subprotocol Name Registry has the "first come,
first served" registration policy, which makes a declarative statement like
this ("this document adds") a bit risky -- what if someone else swoops in
to register this name?

Please have a look at the comments from the TSV-ART review (and thanks to Jörg for the review)!