[DNSOP] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org> Thu, 04 January 2024 07:06 UTC
Return-Path: <noreply@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: dnsop@ietf.org
Delivered-To: dnsop@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B7B4C18DB8D; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 23:06:39 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation@ietf.org, dnsop-chairs@ietf.org, dnsop@ietf.org, benno@NLnetLabs.nl, swoolf@pir.org, tjw.ietf@gmail.com
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 12.1.0
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: Murray Kucherawy <superuser@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <170435199903.21411.14922172875370722591@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2024 23:06:39 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dnsop/MmRQNzgwKAQ0Qqc7gTV9WzM2GaM>
Subject: [DNSOP] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-16: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: dnsop@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
List-Id: IETF DNSOP WG mailing list <dnsop.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dnsop/>
List-Post: <mailto:dnsop@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop>, <mailto:dnsop-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2024 07:06:39 -0000
Murray Kucherawy has entered the following ballot position for draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation-16: 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/about/groups/iesg/statements/handling-ballot-positions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions. The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-avoid-fragmentation/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCUSS: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Please address the point raised by Barry Leiba in his ARTART review. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I support Rob Wilton's DISCUSS position. Piling on a bit, in reference to: R6. UDP requestors SHOULD limit the requestor's maximum UDP payload size to the RECOMMENDED size of 1400 or a smaller size. I think the "RECOMMENDED" here is just carrying forward a "RECOMMENDED" from someplace else. If that's correct, I suggest changing it to "recommended" or, if you want to be more precise, "... to the size recommended by RFCXXXX of 1400 or smaller." Now it's clear what the SHOULD is referencing, and you don't own the RECOMMENDED part here. I suggest defining "EMSGSIZE" in Section 2 to be the UNIX error code of the same name. Otherwise, we encounter it in Section 3.1 in a way that could mean it's an error code (which is how I think you intend it) or as a symbolic name for the path MTU size.
- [DNSOP] Murray Kucherawy's Discuss on draft-ietf-… Murray Kucherawy via Datatracker