-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > On 18 mei 2009, at 23:10, Joe Touch wrote: > >> if we have protocols that won't >> function when the larger packet gets through, we have a problem. That >> effectively means the MTU is the smaller number, i.e., that compression >> may save BW, but cannot support a larger MTU even if it is dominant. > > Not necessarily. PMTUD for tunnels is just an optimization. There is no > reason why you couldn't take full size inner packets and encapsulate > them in an outer packet that is then fragmented. You wouldn't know to do that unless you had a different idea of the MTU at the endpoint. Or are you suggesting that ROHC do this (I don't think it would)... > Now doing that for 100% of the packets isn't great, but doing it for 5% > of the packets could very well be the right choice. Sure - but we'd be relying on that. Joe -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkoR0FcACgkQE5f5cImnZrulvgCfeTfYFctI141iCCIPs7DB/2y1 NFYAoIYodvrtNXNsxrZQnfOfnzkY7C/d =2XgW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
