It will just be easier to support an insane MTU size so that people can go and do whatever they want. I can imagine people doing some vlan in vlan and then running the whole works over a tunnel, and each one adds tags and headers to the actual 1500 byte payload.
Lonnie On 8/14/06, Tom DeReggi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Lonnie, I just wrote to you off list, before seeing your onlist response. >V3 has support for a fully transparent > client bridge when it talks to an appropriately configured V3 AP system. That is good news! > License Fee after 1 year. The policy you explained, is fair and reasonable. > We are currently working on a custom MTU size interface for every > device to be able to handle whatever you want for MTU size. Great. To be more clear... Its easy for people (like me) to get confused between IP versus Ethernet headers. In our VLAN applications, its the Ethernet packet that needs to be supported above 1500bytes (for addition of VLAN to Ethernet header), we'd rarely ever need to increase IP packet MTU above 1500 MTU. (although I see applications for IPSEC if larger MTU allowed or possibly for passing MPLS). Tom DeReggi RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
-- Lonnie Nunweiler Valemount Networks Corporation http://www.star-os.com/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
