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

Request Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-alpn
Requested rev. 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
Draft 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
Review review-ietf-rtcweb-alpn-03-opsdir-lc-pignataro-2016-04-18
Reviewed rev. 03 (document currently at 04)
Review result Has Issues
Review 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 considerations.

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