Just to make these documents a bit more digestible by reviewers, ADs, and readers, who will almost certainly be reading them as a set ...
I'm OK with the separation of the Pass 1 analysis of UDP(-lite) into a separate draft, but I wish the relationship was a little clearer. It seems like https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-06#section-3.4 has more text describing UDP(-lite) than it needs, if it's just going to say "The set of Pass 1 primitives for UDP and UDP-Lite is documented in [FJ16].". If this makes sense to the working group, that description of UDP could be integrated into https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-taps-transports-usage-udp-04#section-3, which only has a one-sentence description of UDP itself before beginning its analysis. Is there any chance that each document could provide a pointer to the other document, in the Abstract and Introduction sections, and be clearer about the relationship there? Thanks, Spencer
_______________________________________________ Taps mailing list Taps@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/taps
