routing protocols will provide path-MTU
Craig Partridge <craig@NNSC.NSF.NET> Mon, 26 February 1990 12:43 UTC
Received: from decwrl.dec.com by acetes.pa.dec.com (5.54.5/4.7.34) id AA28744; Mon, 26 Feb 90 04:43:51 PST
Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA03097; Mon, 26 Feb 90 04:43:46 -0800
Message-Id: <9002261243.AA03097@decwrl.dec.com>
To: deering@pescadero.stanford.edu
Cc: mtudwg
Subject: routing protocols will provide path-MTU
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 1990 07:42:59 -0500
From: Craig Partridge <craig@NNSC.NSF.NET>
> This keeps popping up. Would someone please explain this in more > detail? Exactly how are the routing protocols going to maintain or > acquire the path-MTU information that hosts need, and how are the hosts > going to learn that information and detect changes in that information? > I can imagine several possible schemes, including giving up dynamic, > datagram routing in favor of static, virtual-circuit routing (which > seems to be where politics-based routing is headed), but I'd really > like to get some facts before I start flaming. :-) Steve: I don't know for sure, but my limited understanding was that with full topology information (ala ARPANET SPF), a router could figure out the safe MTU between two points, and could notify a host if too large a datagram came past. HOWEVER, the advent of hiding area information (IS-IS and OSPF) may mean that it is no longer possible to a router to derive the optimal MTU for a path. (Mind you, the area could advertise the lowest MTU of any through path within it, but that clearly leads to very non-optimal situations). <Now, Noel can tell me I'm all wet> Craig
- routing protocols will provide path-MTU Craig Partridge
- Re: routing protocols will provide path-MTU Steve Deering
- Re: routing protocols will provide path-MTU Noel Chiappa
- Re: routing protocols will provide path-MTU Steve Deering