On Thursday, July 4, 2024 7:05:22 AM PDT Tim Wicinski wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 9:26 PM David Farmer <far...@umn.edu> wrote: > > 2. Also, maybe R5 should have text similar to R3 with "...the minimum > > of...the interface MTU, the network MTU...and 1400 bytes..." Instead of > > "It should use a limit of 1400 bytes, but a smaller limit MAY be used." > > Something like this: > > "UDP requestors should limit the requestor's maximum UDP payload size to > use the RECOMMENDED size of 1400 bytes, but a smaller limit MAY be used."
As before, I'd like to future-proof this document. 1400 may not survive and should not be a hard limit. If someone ever gets PLPMTUD working, or if local knowledge includes MTU over a topology as a static configuration, then the recommended value should be ignored, and the measured or locally defined limit should be the operational maximum for that datagram. Thus, not only a smaller limit, but also a larger limit, may be sometimes used. This document need not enumerate all such cases, but should not require revision if 1400 turns out to be like 640KB -- not a sensible limit for all possible futures. -- P Vixie
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list -- dnsop@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to dnsop-le...@ietf.org
