(Please note: crossposted to 6man and intarea, please prune as desired.)
I've been working on a specification that allows for hosts on the same subnet
to be configured with different jumboframe MTUs and then use the largest packet
size supported by the sender and the receiver as well as the swit
Hi Pat,
Not sure if you're still reading a year and a half later, but here goes...
On 14 Nov 2014, at 20:56, Pat Thaler wrote:
> Abstract and 1 mention sending an Ethernet maximum frame size of 1500 bytes
> and the referenced RFC 4321 in 7.2 mentions backing that off to 1400 bytes to
> allow
Updated based on comment from Dave Thaler.
Let me know if there are any other open issues; I don't have any.
Erik
Forwarded Message
Subject:New Version Notification for draft-nordmark-intarea-ippl-03.txt
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 11:15:29 -0700
From: internet-dra.
On 11/5/15 1:24 AM, Dave Thaler wrote:
I notice that currently RFC 4389 is not referenced at all.
It’s Experimental since there are many ways of proxying and it just
describes one of them,
but I still think it bears referencing informatively, especially since
section 6 of that RFC is
very
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the Internet Area Working Group of the IETF.
Title : IP over Intentionally Partially Partitioned Links
Author : Erik Nordmark
Filename: d
[With better from address]
On 11/5/15 1:24 AM, Dave Thaler wrote:
I notice that currently RFC 4389 is not referenced at all.
It’s Experimental since there are many ways of proxying and it just
describes one of them,
but I still think it bears referencing informatively, especially since
se
On 11/5/15 1:28 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Dave Thaler wrote:
I notice that currently RFC 4389 is not referenced at all.
It’s Experimental since there are many ways of proxying and it just
describes one of them,
but I still think it bears referencing informatively, espec
