Reviewer: Joe Clarke Review result: Not Ready I have been assigned to review this document on behalf of the Ops directorate. In general, I found the document well-written, but the reason I marked it as not ready as I was confused as to its standards track trajectory. I do not see any kind of inter-operable standard being defined here. On my reading -- before I noticed it was standards track -- it felt informational. While it does set out a threat model for the browser, I struggle to see how that needs to be standardized. On that threat model note, the abstract indicates that the WebRTC threat model will be laid out, but section 3 defines a more general browser threat model. Beyond those items, I noticed various nits and other small items when reading the document. Most broadly, I feel this document would benefit from a terminology section to define acronyms such as ICE, TURN, STUN, VoIP, etc. Additionally, in section 3.1, the document refers to "scripts" in a general way. While the implication is JavaScript code that will run in a browser, I think that kind of context setting might be made more explicit in a terminology section. Other nits are mentioned below on a section-by-section basis. Section 1: s/implementated/implemented/ === Section 3.2: s/provide a escape hatch/provide an escape hatch/ === Section 4.2: s/signficant/significant/ === Section 4.2.3: s/ threats is less severe/threats are less severe/ === Section 4.3: s/ The calling service is is/The calling service is/ === Section 4.3.2.1: OLD: (a) the browser to trusted UI to provide the name and I don't grok this sentence fragment. There seems to be a verb missing, and I'm not sure what your intent is here. === Section 4.3.2.2: s/e.g., read aloud over the the voice/e.g., read aloud over the voice/ s/However, it it is well-known/However, it is well-known/
