On 1/22/15 10:54 AM, Alexander Mayrhofer wrote:
* PROTOCOL: Is the expected behaviour (MUST) from both client and server
that they should add the Option to every single request / response during a
keepalive session? Please clarify the intended behaviour..
Two final comments, sorry:
* EDITORIAL/PROTOCOL: Shouldn't the option (as well as the draft) be renamed from "keepalive" to "timeout"?
To my understanding "keepalive" would refer to a mechanism where "empty, ping style packets" would be used to
keep the session established, and be misleading for a mechanism to negotiate timeout values... change to
"edns-tcp-timeout" Option, and according draft name?
* PROTOCOL: Are there any race conditions when this Option is used in conjunction with
Ray's "Connection Close" flag
(https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bellis-dnsop-connection-close-00)?
The two options are alternative proposals - there should never be a
reality where both proposals exist as supported options.
tim
_______________________________________________
DNSOP mailing list
DNSOP@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
