[dnssd] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dnssd-multi-qtypes-01.txt

[Ray Bellis <[e-mail]>]

On 31/05/2024 17:58, Chris Box wrote:

> Thanks for the update, Ray. I've read through the diffs and it seems 
> pretty clear, so thumbs up from me.

Thanks Chris :)

> I only noted two editorial suggestions.
> 
> In the introduction, "/To mitigate these issues/" makes less sense 
> now that we have less articulation of the issues in this version.
> One solution is to simply delete those four words and begin the
> sentence with "This document".

I've removed that and tweaked the sentence some more for clarity.

> In section 3.2, the word "/secondary/" to me suggests less-preferred 
> or lower-tier, which isn't the intended meaning. (The sentence in 
> question is "/The use of a secondary option code in responses/".) 
> Perhaps s/secondary/second/ ?

I've actually removed that second (!) sentence as it pretty much
just duplicated text that was already in the introduction.

I've also addressed David's 2nd comment by moving the text about 
omitting QTx values into the previously discussed paragraph that now 
addresses both inclusion and exclusion.

Please see commit 7ba0f4af365fc4f97a883e8562b37db390094b62

Ray