Pekka Savola wrote:

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003, Jun-ichiro itojun Hagino wrote:
[...]


the assumption made in RFC2461 is that the link MTU is constant
over the link, i guess. i don't think it is necessary to make
MTU negotiable between peers, it would complicate too many things.



FWIW, I agree with this assumption. Really, if you want to put different MTU's on the same link and want to optimize it, use multiple links..

Not possible in all cases; take multi-access wireless media, for example.

We must face facts that there are multiple access, shared-media links
out there and will continue to be for the forseeable future. We can wish
for a densely-connected mesh of point-to-point links (e.g., ATM PVCs)
but we needs-be have to support the L2 infrastructure that is already
deployed. (Otherwise, we would have to go through an L2 transition
before we even begin to tackle the IPv6 transition.)

Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to