Then you want some lower layer to the app to fragment. That is not a good idea.
Dino > On Dec 8, 2021, at 7:42 PM, Templin (US), Fred L <fred.l.temp...@boeing.com> > wrote: > > >> >> Does that mean no app should send more than 576? > > Dino, I am not sure what to say in response to this other than you must not > be reading > my messages. I want apps to be able to use whatever packet size gives them > the best > performance *even if the packet size exceeds the path MTU*. Also, to > dynamically tune > their packet sizes in case network conditions change and even use jumbos if > they want > and if the path will support it. If that has not come across to you, please > go back and > read my messages. > > Fred > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Dino Farinacci [mailto:farina...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 2021 3:58 PM >> To: Templin (US), Fred L <fred.l.temp...@boeing.com> >> Cc: to...@strayalpha.com; int-area@ietf.org >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [Int-area] Side meeting follow-up: What exact >> features do we want from the Internet? >> >> EXT email: be mindful of links/attachments. >> >> >> >> >> >>>> On Dec 8, 2021, at 5:33 PM, Templin (US), Fred L >>>> <fred.l.temp...@boeing.com> wrote: >>> >>> Dino, my response to your response is "MTU diversity everywhere, with 576 >>> as the >>> minimum cell size". I know Joe won't like that, but I can't get him to give >>> a straight >>> answer. >> >> Does that mean no app should send more than 576? That would be a bug, a >> major performance bug. And you would be way too late to the >> table. If it was the minimum an app has to send, that is a bug too and tardy >> as well. >> >> So let’s move on to requirements again. I bet this list is bored with the >> topic. >> >> Dino= > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
