Brian Haberman has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive-04: Discuss
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-edns-tcp-keepalive/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support the publication of this document, but I have a point I want to discuss to help with the clarity of the spec. Section 3.2.1 says that clients send this option with the first query sent on a TCP connection and Section 3.2.2 says it should honor the timeout provided by the server and close the socket when appropriate. What is not discussed is how the client should manage the timer with respect to the reception of multiple query responses that may, or may not, include edns-tcp-keepalive option. Section 3.3.2 says the server MAY send the option, so it is up to the server to decide when to include the option and the corresponding timeout value. Should the client's timer simply reflect the value sent in the latest response? The smallest remaining time? I think a few sentences on client timer management would be beneficial. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
