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 rev. no specific revision (document currently at 06)
Type Telechat Review
Team Transport Area Review Team (tsvart)
Deadline 2018-06-19
Requested 2018-05-31
Other 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)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Magnus Westerlund
Review review-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-05-tsvart-telechat-westerlund-2018-06-11
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tsv-art/39RYhiRJYY4Sdx_hh-EyzUXRiYE
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 06)
Review result Ready with Nits
Draft last updated 2018-06-11
Review completed: 2018-06-11

Review
review-ietf-dprive-padding-policy-05-tsvart-telechat-westerlund-2018-06-11

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.