Rick Thomas a écrit :
> On Jun 3, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Jeffrey B. Green wrote:
> 
> The RFCs say that any conforming implementation MUST handle an MTU of  
> 1280, and may not necessarily handle anything larger.

Wha is your point in mentionning this requirement ? Do you mean that the
server should not send packets bigger than 1280 bytes if it fails to
handle properly path MTU discovery ? If so, I fully agree.

> So it makes  
> sense (if you're going to go to the trouble of setting the MTU in the  
> first place) to use that number.

Lowering the MTU at the client side does not fix the problem that exists
at the server side. It is just a workaround that works for TCP because
it happens that TCP uses the *outgoing* MTU to calculate the advertised
*incoming* MSS (how weird when you consider that internet routing is
likely to be asymmetric).


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4deb88c5.2050...@plouf.fr.eu.org

Reply via email to