Subject: [clue] Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-15: (with COMMENT)

From: Roman Danyliw via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:41:32 -0700

Roman Danyliw has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-15: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-clue-datachannel/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

---

From: Christer Holmberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 10:04:11 +0000

Hi Roman,

Thank You for the review! Please see inline.

    
>    [I-D.ietf-clue-protocol] messages/
  
Will fix.

---
  
>    Data Channel Establishment Protocol/
  
Will fix.

---

>    (e.g., regarding ordered delivery)/
  
Will fix.

---

>    (4) Section 3.2.1.  Typo.  s/signalled/signaled/
  
Will fix.

---
  
>    previous part of the paragraph.  Right now the text only states something about
    
Good catch! I suggest to modify the text in the following way:

   "NOTE: [I-D.ietf-rtcweb-data-channel] requires the support of the
   partial reliability extension defined in [RFC3758] and the limited
   retransmission policy defined in [RFC7496]. The extensions are not
   needed for a CLUE data channel, as messages are required to always be
   sent reliably."

In addition, I suggest to add a reference to RFC 7496 to the text in the paragraph above, in the following way:

    "A CLUE entity MUST NOT use the partial reliability, defined in [RFC3758], or the limited
    retransmission SCTP extensions, defined in [RFC3758], for the CLUE data channel."

Thanks!

Regards,

Christer

---

From: Roman Danyliw <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2019 14:49:38 +0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christer Holmberg [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2019 6:04 AM
> To: Roman Danyliw <[email-masked]>; The IESG <[email-masked]>
> Cc: [email-masked]; Paul Kyzivat
> <[email-masked]>; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: Roman Danyliw's No Objection on draft-ietf-clue-datachannel-
> 15: (with COMMENT)
> 
> Hi Roman,
> 

Sounds good.  Thanks for making these changes.

Roman