Skip to main content

Telechat Review of draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-05
review-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-05-tsvart-telechat-westerlund-2018-06-11-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Telechat Review
Team Transport Area Review Team (tsvart)
Deadline 2018-06-19
Requested 2018-05-31
Authors Alexander Mayrhofer
I-D last updated 2018-06-11
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -04 by Charlie Kaufman (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -04 by Meral Shirazipour (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -04 by Joe Clarke (diff)
Tsvart Last Call review of -04 by Magnus Westerlund (diff)
Tsvart Telechat review of -05 by Magnus Westerlund (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Magnus Westerlund
State Completed
Request Telechat review on draft-ietf-dprive-padding-policy by Transport Area Review Team Assigned
Reviewed revision 05 (document currently at 06)
Result Ready w/nits
Completed 2018-06-11
review-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-05-tsvart-telechat-westerlund-2018-06-11-00
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.