Operational feedback on PMTUD
Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Wed, 15 March 2017 10:56 UTC
Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9924B129B1D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 03:56:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 21vw7jW67Gkc for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 03:56:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 77433129B36 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 03:56:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 6791 invoked from network); 15 Mar 2017 10:58:10 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 15 Mar 2017 10:58:10 -0000
To: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Subject: Operational feedback on PMTUD
Message-ID: <cef9e432-e6a8-5f90-f61d-67278561cb2f@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 19:56:46 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/mwfmQJKN2K2ZLUQyM9JtzAQxKJU>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 10:56:54 -0000
Hi all;
Just a procedural question.
Though rfc2026 says:
A specification for which significant implementation and successful
operational experience has been obtained may be elevated to the
Internet Standard level. An Internet Standard (which may simply be
referred to as a Standard) is characterized by a high degree of
technical maturity and by a generally held belief that the specified
protocol or service provides significant benefit to the Internet
community.
does rfc1981bis qualify?
It seems to me that rfc1981 operationally failed and rfc4821 was
developed, which means PMTUD can be IS only when rfc4821 become IS.
Or, do I misunderstand something?
Masataka Ohta
- Operational feedback on PMTUD Masataka Ohta
- Re: Operational feedback on PMTUD Masataka Ohta
- Re: Operational feedback on PMTUD Suresh Krishnan
- Re: Operational feedback on PMTUD Masataka Ohta