Apps could (and would still need to) send individual payloads - but not have those payloads decreased based on how many headers are used. Again, like Ethernet.
Think of it this way: Ethernet user payload is 1500B, always. There’s no such thing as an Ethernet-layer MTU because headers can vary. Joe — Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist www.strayalpha.com > On Dec 7, 2021, at 4:56 PM, Dino Farinacci <farina...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Since you can't FEC IP fragments, the apps have to do it. And since the apps > do it, they fragment on IP MTU boundaries. > > Dino > >> On Dec 7, 2021, at 6:54 PM, to...@strayalpha.com wrote: >> >> I think we’re generally in agreement. >> >> My view is that fragmentation is currently a necessary evil. Evil that >> should be avoided where possible, but necessary that MUST be supported. >> >> Joe >> >> — >> Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist >> www.strayalpha.com >> >>> On Dec 7, 2021, at 3:46 PM, Dino Farinacci <farina...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Right, I understand this. I said *it could8 use larger headers. So sounds >>> like we are in agremement. That is, if we can't agree on 1400 because >>> protocols have been spec'ed for smaller ones, that is where we are headed. >>> In the opposite direction we wantn to go. >>> >>> Hence, there is no way to technically fix this. And fragmentation is *not >>> the solution*. It will cause more packet loss and time-out buffers in >>> receivers. >>> >>> But what apps can do, and I know many that do is to send a packet train of >>> MTU sized packets with FEC. So when there is loss, the receiver can build >>> the packets via erasure codes. >>> >>> Dino >
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
