Thanks for the quick response, Sara, and for addressing my comments. Barry
On Wednesday, January 6, 2016, Sara Dickinson <s...@sinodun.com> wrote: > > > On 6 Jan 2016, at 07:57, Barry Leiba <barryle...@computer.org > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for > > draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04: No Objection > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > COMMENT: > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > -- Section 1 -- > > > > Long-lived > > TCP connections can result in lower request latency than the case > > where UDP transport is used and truncated responses are received, > > since clients that have fallen back to TCP transport in response to a > > truncated response typically only uses the TCP session for a single > > (request, response) pair, continuing with UDP transport for > > subsequent queries. > > > > This is a really long, awkward sentence, and it appears to have an error > > > > in it that makes it unparseable. > > Point taken. I have re-worded it to make it clearer. > > > But the use > > in > > the abstract and at the top of page 4 are not. I suggest "clients > > commonly use TCP only for retries" in the abstract, and "received over > > UDP > > with retries over TCP" on page 4. > > > > Yes, I think this is clearer. I have updated as suggested. > > Changes are in the -05 version published this morning. > > Regards > > Sara. > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
