On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 07:42:02PM +0000, Darcy Kevin (FCA) <kevin.da...@fcagroup.com> wrote a message of 1087 lines which said:
> I too have been tempted to comment on the fact that there is no > QNAME that is being "minimized" here (which would imply making it > shorter; not the gist of the proposal at all). I really do not understand you. With Qname minimisation, the Qname *will* be shorter. > If we're stuck on the term "minimization", make it clear that it's > not the QNAME itself that's being "minimized", -1 > but the actual number of query transactions being minimized. -1 _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
