Re: [RAM] Tunnelling & GigE jumbo frame size

On  12 Sep 2007, at 14:13, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> Let me make several points at once. This is my computer at home,
> a Mac laptop:

(A bunch of irrelevant stuff deleted here.  What a Mac
can or can't do isn't representative of anything beyond Apple,
certainly not of the entire world.)

> We need to move to a situation where the capability to use larger
> packets is used where it exists and to the degree that it exists.

I know of a LOT of metro SPs and ISPs and IXs that already support
the 9180++ MTU that I outlined before -- in their operational network
right now.  I think NDAs do not permit me to enumerate the list
that I know about personally...it isn't a short list in any event.

> But for the purposes of a jack up solution we just need a few dozen  
> extra bytes to accommodate the new headers without triggering the  
> breakage that ensues when 1500-byte packets can't be forwarded  
> without fragmentation.

If you believe the above, why have you been wasting everyone's time
just now ?

Ran

_______________________________________________
RAM mailing list
RAM@iab.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ram