Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-alpn-03

Request Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-alpn
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Last Call Review
Team Ops Directorate (opsdir)
Deadline 2016-04-21
Requested 2016-04-10
Authors Martin Thomson
I-D last updated 2016-04-18
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -03 by Russ Housley (diff)
Secdir Telechat review of -03 by Benjamin Kaduk (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -03 by Carlos Pignataro (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Carlos Pignataro
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-rtcweb-alpn by Ops Directorate Assigned
Reviewed revision 03 (document currently at 04)
Result Has issues
Completed 2016-04-18

I have reviewed this document as part of the Operational directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written with the intent of improving the operational aspects of
the IETF drafts. Comments that are not addressed in last call may be included
in AD reviews during the IESG review.  Document editors and WG chairs should
treat these comments just like any other last call comments.

This document’s intended status is in the Standards Track, and defines labels
for Application Layer Protocol Negotiation (ALPN) to be used in identifying
WebRTC (webrtc, and c-webrtc).

The document is short, simple, well organized and very easy to read and follow.
It is precise in the use of language, and does not have unaddressed operational

Summary: Ready with a couple of questions




3.  Media Confidentiality

   A browser is required to enforce this confidentiality protection
   using isolation controls similar to those used in content cross-
   origin protections (see Section 5.3 [1] of [HTML5]).

Is this “required” or “REQUIRED”? Seems it should be the latter.



I hope these comments are useful.


— Carlos.




 Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail