IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Idr] why has 4096 bytes limit on BGP messages size?

"Bhatia, Manav \(Manav\)" <manav@alcatel-lucent.com> Mon, 18 June 2007 06:49 UTC

Return-path: <idr-bounces@ietf.org>
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0B3Z-0006v9-Ju; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:49:45 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0B3Y-0006uw-GI for idr@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:49:44 -0400
Received: from ihemail4.lucent.com ([135.245.0.39]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I0B3X-0002bV-6U for idr@ietf.org; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 02:49:44 -0400
Received: from ilexp01.ndc.lucent.com (h135-3-39-1.lucent.com [135.3.39.1]) by ihemail4.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id l5I6mA7u007639; Mon, 18 Jun 2007 01:49:40 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from inexp02.in.lucent.com ([135.254.223.66]) by ilexp01.ndc.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 01:48:39 -0500
Received: from INEXC1U01.in.lucent.com ([135.254.223.20]) by inexp02.in.lucent.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:18:34 +0530
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Idr] why has 4096 bytes limit on BGP messages size?
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:18:34 +0530
Message-ID: <6D26D1FE43A66F439F8109CDD424196586F557@INEXC1U01.in.lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <77ead0ec0706172339i69ef6febwaea1ca5eec9a3386@mail.gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Idr] why has 4096 bytes limit on BGP messages size?
thread-index: Acexc3AaY0spk6oyQW6SQBup3HW+OQAAHWjg
References: <982B9BFB-D286-40D5-9A07-3D2DB51BC102@cisco.com><200706180505.l5I550pR003832@sailbum.orleans.occnc.com> <77ead0ec0706172339i69ef6febwaea1ca5eec9a3386@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Bhatia, Manav (Manav)" <manav@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Vishwas Manral <vishwas.ietf@gmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jun 2007 06:48:34.0853 (UTC) FILETIME=[B113B550:01C7B174]
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 135.245.2.39
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25
Cc: idr <idr@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: idr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Inter-Domain Routing <idr.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/idr>
List-Post: <mailto:idr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr>, <mailto:idr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: idr-bounces@ietf.org

Hi Vishwas,

> I agree with both the statements above. Having recently written some
> DTCP/ IP and AKE implementation from scratch (both work over TCP), I
> agree with you. The TCP does not differentiate between packet
> boundaries from the application. So if 2 packets of size 2500 are sent
> from the application it could be similar to the case of having sent 1
> packet of 5000 bytes.
> 
> Let me know if I am wrong?

Yup, you are right. The application at the other end would never know if
TCP received two packets each of 2500 bytes or a single packet of 5000
bytes. 

Manav

_______________________________________________
Idr mailing list
Idr@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email