Skip to main content

Last Call Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18

Request Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 19)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2017-03-20
Requested 2017-03-06
Authors Harald T. Alvestrand
Draft last updated 2017-03-22
Completed reviews Secdir Telechat review of -18 by Dan Harkins (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -18 by Jon Mitchell (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -18 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Meral Shirazipour
State Completed
Review review-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18-genart-lc-shirazipour-2017-03-22
Reviewed revision 18 (document currently at 19)
Result Ready with Nits
Completed 2017-03-22
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

Document: draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-18
Reviewer: Meral Shirazipour
Review Date: 2017-03-16
IETF LC End Date:   2017-03-20
IESG Telechat date: 2017-04-13

This draft is ready to be published as Standards Track RFC but I have comments.

Major issues:
Minor issues:
Nits/editorial comments:
-[Page 3] "an other hardware has"---->"and other hardware have"
-[Page 4], the word "subprotocol" was not clear to me. Would it be possible to
add in parenthesis a few example for protocol and subprotocol? -[Page 4], "an
WebRTC"--->""a WebRTC" -[Page 7], "Interactive Connectivty"--->"Interactive
Connectivity" -General: please spell out acronyms at first use -General: the
writing (or perhaps lack of punctuation) in this draft made it hard to read.
Please consider reviewing it especially if the draft is intended as Standards

Best Regards,
Meral Shirazipour
Ericsson Research