Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-21
review-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-21-genart-lc-carpenter-2020-07-12-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 24)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2020-07-21
Requested 2020-07-07
Authors Jose M. Recio , Christer Holmberg
I-D last updated 2020-07-12
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -21 by Brian E. Carpenter (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -22 by Alexey Melnikov (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -23 by Yoshifumi Nishida (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -22 by Al Morton (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Brian E. Carpenter
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/NRsOhH878PLxXYL0QUFZYjI55sU
Reviewed revision 21 (document currently at 24)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2020-07-12
review-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-21-genart-lc-carpenter-2020-07-12-00
Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-21

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-mmusic-msrp-usage-data-channel-21
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2020-07-13
IETF LC End Date: 2020-07-21
IESG Telechat date:  

Summary: Ready with nits
--------

Nits:
-----

>> 4.1.  MSRP URI
...
>>     transport  /= "dc"

I see that RFC7977 takes a slightly different approach to updating the ABNF:

>>     transport  =  "tcp" / "ws" / 1*ALPHANUM

The advantage of listing out

  transport  =  "tcp" / "ws" / "dc" / 1*ALPHANUM

would be that the reader sees the full list.

>>                  ; Add "dc" to existing transports per [RFC4975]

I suggest

                 ; Add "dc" to existing transports per Section 9 of [RFC4975]

>>4.6.  Session Closing

>>   The SDP answerer must ensure that no dcmap or dcsa attributes are
>>   present in the SDP answer if no corresponding attributes are present
>>   in the received SDP offer.

Should that be MUST?

>> B2BUA

Define the acronym please.

>> 9.2.  Subprotocol Identifier MSRP
>>
>>   A reference to this document is added to the subprotocol identifier
>>   "msrp" in the "WebSocket Subprotocol Name Registry"

s/this document/RFCXXXX/

>> 11.  CHANGE LOG

Mark this section for deletion by the RFC Editor