A Multipath Transmission System for Information-Centric Networking Based on Standalone Name Resolution

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The topic of the article is relevant and interesting. The article needs a little finishing.

1. In the abstract and conclusions, add the obtained results in numerical equivalent.

2. Shorten the introduction by almost half (remove standard information, and move the rest as a literature review to the next section). A total of 28 references out of 44 were in the introduction. This is already not an introduction but a literature review when most of the references are in this section.

3. It is not permissible to refer to more than 1-2 references of the literature list simultaneously, for example, as [4–13]. It is necessary to describe more thoroughly and separately.

Also, the research's purpose, tasks and novelty should be clearly defined in the introduction.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

·        There are so many references, which are very old. Replace them with recent works, suitably.

·        Include a table of improvement in the result section.

·        Font of figures in the result section is not visible. Kindly increase the font size.

·        Write an acronym of your proposed work in figure 8(c), instead of writing “ours”.

·        What is/are the limitation(s) of your proposed work?

·        Reference [40] is not cited anywhere in the manuscript.

·        There are so many grammatical and typos errors. Proofreading is required.

·        There are so many terms, which are not defined anywhere in the manuscript. For e.g., MPTCP, SCTP, SIGTRAM, etc.  

·        What is the time complexity of your proposed work?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf