Subject: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-10.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:12:19 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers WG of the IETF.

        Title           : WebRTC IP Address Handling Requirements
        Author          : Justin Uberti
	Filename        : draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-10.txt
	Pages           : 12
	Date            : 2018-10-12

Abstract:
   This document provides information and requirements for how IP
   addresses should be handled by WebRTC implementations.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-10
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-10

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-10

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Justin Uberti <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 11:16:13 -0700

This update incorporates feedback from IETF 102, namely that the problems
discussed should all be called out in the problem statement, but some
solutions may be left to future versions of the document.

Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-rtcweb-ip-handling-10

On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 11:13 AM <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 19:07:57 -0400

Justin - Many thanks!

Adam - I’ve changed the state to removed the “Revised I-D Needed - Issue raised by WG” state so this one is ready for your review (and hopefully an IETF LC).

spt

> On Oct 12, 2018, at 14:16, Justin Uberti <juberti=[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> This update incorporates feedback from IETF 102, namely that the problems discussed should all be called out in the problem statement, but some solutions may be left to future versions of the document.
>