Now 90 visitors
Today:731 Yesterday:586
Total: 17736 64S 56P 11R
2024-10-18, Week 42
Journal Homepage
Call for Paper
Author HomePage
Paper Procedure
Paper Submission
Registration Invoice
Welcome Message
Statistics & History
Committee
Paper Archives
Outstanding Papers
Conference Proceedings
Presentation Assistant
Hotel & Travel Info
Photo Gallery
FAQ
Member Login
Scheduler Login
Archives Login
Sponsors
















Virual Oral Question and Answer
IEEE/ICACT20220132 Question.4
Questioner: vasaka.vis@mahidol.edu    2022-02-15 ¿ÀÈÄ 5:32:43 		IEEE/ICACT20220132 Answer.4
Answer by Auhor yongj@gsic.titech.ac.jp   2022-02-15 ¿ÀÈÄ 5:32:43
The research topic is interesting, but it is a bit upset to see your Youtube video that was generated by the text-to-speech engine. You should present by yourself :( For your proposed approach, it seems like that you double the Internet traffic and increase the workload on the DNSSEC enabled cache DNS server. Is there any other trade-off by using your proposed system? In Slide No.18, why there was no results of "Parallel query using "fork"" for Client 1? Moreover, what is the difference between Client 1 and Client 2? Different physical machine specs? Different software? Please kindly explain. Thank you. Thank you very much for your question. Regarding the network traffic, we consider that DNS traffic cause a small volume comparing to other types network traffic thus it is acceptable. In addition, we consider that the proposed system should be deployed on each end client which can be another overhead. The results of "Parallel query using "fork"" is shown in Slide No.17. The Client 1 and 2 are the same machine. We differs them to Client 1 and 2 in order to show the sequence which one queried the full-service resolver first. When the Client 1 queries the full-service resolver for a non-cached domain name it will cause long latency. However, when the Client 2 queries the full-service resolver it will be faster because the cached results can be used.

Select Voice