iscovery/negotiation. Thanks for
Mark, Iljitsch or others.
3) Make a memorandum for Jumbo Frames with current implementations.
Fix the implicit maximum value of RFC2464, how to enable Jumbo
Frames for IPv6, the estimated problems, the implimentation
restrictions, and so on.
always valid. But (1) neglect MTU
option, or (3) MTU option with illegal value for sender itself, are
acceptable?
Ryota Hirose
Yamaha Corporation
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
Hi,
>From: Ryota Hirose <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 08:01:52 +0900 (JST)
> Please refer RFC2467, which is about FDDI. FDDI's MTU is variable by
Please refer RFC2497 also. It is about ARCnet. ARCnet's maximum MTU
is 60480, but RFC2497 says that it is
iew of
users. But, according to RFC2464 and RFC2461 strictly, I think we
cannot use Jumbo Frames on GbE. Is an update memorandum about Jumbo
Frames necessary, isn't it?
Ryota Hirose
Yamaha Corporation
IETF IPv6 working gr
violates a specification of IEEE
802.3. But it is deploied already, and is used for a high performance
application like the file servers. Does anyone have a plan to change
the rule of RFC2464?
Ryota Hirose
Yamaha Corporation
IETF
