nanog mailing list archives
Re: Smallest Transit MTU
From: Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch () muada com>
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:05:52 +0100
On 29-dec-04, at 22:33, Tony Rall wrote:
and who are able to get along just fine by reducing the advertised MSS in their TCP stack.
But that only affects tcp traffic - it does nothing to help other protocols.
I've never seen anything other than TCP set the DF bit...
Current thread:
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU, (continued)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Jerry Pasker (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Tony Rall (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Joe Abley (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Daniel Hagerty (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Alex Bligh (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Joe Abley (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Tony Rall (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Joe Abley (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Edward B. Dreger (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Robert E . Seastrom (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU John Kristoff (Dec 30)
- RE: Smallest Transit MTU David Schwartz (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU John Kristoff (Dec 30)
- RE: Smallest Transit MTU David Schwartz (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Robert E . Seastrom (Dec 30)
