On Dec 7, 2021, at 12:15 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 08-Dec-21 05:30, to...@strayalpha.com wrote: > ... >>> But you make another point which is pretty fundamental and foundational. >>> Should data links be MTU-less, so to speak? And can they really do that. I >>> won't hold my breath. >> I don’t know yet, but I do know that’s what I *want* and why it’s different >> than simply assuming a smaller MTU anywhere in the system. > > I think you'll need to discuss this point with the inventors of packet > switching and queueing theory. Since the Internet is still basically a great > big statistical multiplexer, getting rid of MTU at every layer seems like an > impossibility.
Perhaps, or maybe MTUs are an artifact of limited memory and BW. I’m not suggesting infinite packets - though that’s another interesting exercise in protocol design (what if packets were infinite, what if protocols used only one packet, etc.). I’m suggesting an environment in which applications always assume some “MTU” and the headers are just “eaten” as overhead throughout the rest of the system, sort of the way that Ethernet has a 1500 fixed payload but no strict packet length limit (arguably, you can add Q-tags or MAC-in-MAC all day long). Joe _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
