Subject: [rmcat] Benoit Claise's No Objection on draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc-06: (with COMMENT)

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2017 02:29:58 -0700

Benoit Claise has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc-06: 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-rmcat-coupled-cc/

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

Editorial:

age 1:     The first sentence: “When multiple congestion controlled RTP
sessions...”.

I suggest expanding the “RTP”, like Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP), since
it first appear in the document.

Page 1:     The last sentence: “It specifies how to apply the method for the
NADA congestion control...”.

I suggest expanding the “NADA”, like Network-Assisted Dynamic Adaptation
(NADA). The reason same to above item.

Page 3:     The first paragraph: “sometimes the rate is increased further,
until packets are ECN-marked or dropped.”

            I suggest adding a reference to help the readers understanding
            “ECN-marked”.

Page 3:     Suggest adding a term definition: “Flow State Identifiers (FSIs)”
which be used in section 4 but not be introduced in the section 2 Definitions.

Page 11:    6.1 NADA -- " Network-Assisted Dynamic Adapation (NADA)
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-nada] is a congestion control scheme for rtcweb."

I suggest adding a reference or some sentence to help the readers understand
the “rtcweb”.

A run of idnits revealed there were 0 error, 3 warning and 2 comments:

  Miscellaneous warnings:

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  -- The document date (March 28, 2017) is 140 days in the past.  Is this

     intentional?

  -- Found something which looks like a code comment -- if you have code

     sections in the document, please surround them with '<CODE BEGINS>' and

     '<CODE ENDS>' lines.

  Checking references for intended status: Experimental

  ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

  == Outdated reference: A later version (-04) exists of

     draft-ietf-rmcat-nada-03

  == Outdated reference: A later version (-05) exists of

     draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test-04

  == Outdated reference: A later version (-08) exists of

     draft-ietf-rmcat-sbd-04

     Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 2 comments (--).

     Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about

     the items above.