IETF Logo Mail Archive

[lp-wan] overview issue#1: worst case MTU...

Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Sun, 14 May 2017 09:38 UTC

Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
X-Original-To: lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A211126D74 for <lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 May 2017 02:38:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.402
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.402 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 E0eX1Pp0S6EP for <lp-wan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 May 2017 02:38:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9A621296B3 for <lp-wan@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 May 2017 02:37:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D9BEBE3E for <lp-wan@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 May 2017 10:37:09 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id C6jVCd4Sj6tR for <lp-wan@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 May 2017 10:37:08 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [10.244.2.100] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AE5EBBDD0 for <lp-wan@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 May 2017 10:37:07 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1494754628; bh=/Jkng3SKfEyAm5QWbwgiBxmzvE5c9iw2LF87x6+/I/w=; h=To:From:Subject:Date:From; b=yPc9YgZaDR0sxRQ+vacHYqojRPbQswc46E0zFeLe53WNLKF2V5rRiewSN7t0f2qrm 6YP/+MBHqtFdo5qqG7s9jOVkZzjBE7JHWSC6IhcaLTQg/itqaF64fhF9Wts2rkNA48 YJyd9tYe4RkL6YXYOgSKigaREc8uV3NFOM/EPDjE=
To: lp-wan <lp-wan@ietf.org>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <f690b974-ed1c-e3b4-0324-0324bc41f5fb@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 10:37:07 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="PW2INLEwMmTXmmDBh6RwJC2dxaEuqTSqc"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lp-wan/qxtyQcFxC6DLiuXQg7oYDKl5tIM>
Subject: [lp-wan] overview issue#1: worst case MTU...
X-BeenThere: lp-wan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Low-Power Wide Area Networking \(LP-WAN\), also known as LPWA or Low-Rate WAN \(LR-WAN\)" <lp-wan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lp-wan>, <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lp-wan/>
List-Post: <mailto:lp-wan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lp-wan>, <mailto:lp-wan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 May 2017 09:39:00 -0000


Hiya,

In [1], I note that I don't know what's the worst case MTU
that might apply in NB-IoT. Does anyone know? To be clear,
I'm asking what MTU would apply in the worst-case network
conditions where some LPWAN traffic can get through. (Though
there's probably a better way to ask the question:-)

Do the WG think that it'd be useful to have that for each
of the technologies covered? (I think it would, fwiw.)

Cheers,
S.

[1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lpwan-overview-02#section-2.2.2

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email