Magnus, thanks for spotting that. This must have been a late stage editorial mishap before i uploaded the XML. I will address this together with other changes from the IESG evaluation.
best, Alex On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 2:49 PM, Magnus Westerlund <[email protected]> wrote: > Reviewer: Magnus Westerlund > Review result: Ready with Nits > > This is a follow up to the previous review: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-04-tsvart-lc-westerlund-2018-04-04/ > > Thanks for resolving the previously raised issues. > > I did notice in Section 4.1 that the following paragraph: > > The Block Size will interact with the MTU size. Especially for > length values that are a large fraction of the MTU, unless the block > length is chosen so that a multiple just fits into the MTU, Block > Length Padding may cause unneccessary fragmentation for UDP based > delivery. Also, chosing a block length larger than the MTU of course > forces to always fragment. > > Is repeated with just one paragraph between them. > _______________________________________________ dns-privacy mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dns-privacy
