Subject: [tsvwg] Alissa Cooper's Yes on draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos-16: (with COMMENT)

From: "Alissa Cooper" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 May 2016 11:13:35 -0700

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos-16: Yes

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-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos/

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

I would suggest doing a pass through the document to check for uses of
the term "browser" and "non-browser" to see if they could or should align
with the terms defined in RFC 7742. It's not obvious to me why this
document is using a different definition of "browser" than is used in
that document.

---

From: "Black, David" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 May 2016 00:41:27 +0000

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tsvwg-rtcweb-qos/

That's a fine suggestion - the terminology ought to be consistent.

Thanks, --David (as draft shepherd)