> On 9 Aug 2019, at 10:27 am, Bob Hinden wrote:
>
> Tom,
>
>> On Aug 9, 2019, at 7:47 AM, Tom Herbert wrote:
>>
>>
>> As the document highlights the problems of fragmentation are caused by
>> nonconformant middlebox implementations. There is nothing inherently
>> wrong with the fragmentatio
>
> Geoff,
>
> The broad measurements are almost always a limited viewpoint taken at point
> in time.
I was referring to Internet measurements using the Internet. The conversation
was (I thought) about the prospects for ever cleaning up Internet middleware on
the Internet. The context of the
>>
>> This would seem to be incorrect. IP has a minimum MTU of 68 bytes, and
>> IPv6 has a minimum MTU of 1280. Hence if you send packets smaller than
>> or equal to the minimum MTU, the packets should go through.
>
> Even if the original source uses the IPv6 minimum MTU of 1280, a tunnel
> som
> On 16 Dec 2021, at 8:09 pm, Luigi Iannone wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> We have had a very nice discussion in the previous thread about what kind of
> features we would want from the Internet.
>
> We wanted to come back on another interesting point that has been raised
> during the side mee
> On 17 Dec 2021, at 7:33 am, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>
> I sure hope you are wrong about where things are going.
so do I.
> Because the logical consequence of the placement and addressing picture you
> paint is that all innovation in applications and uses of the Internet comes
> from incum
> On 17 Dec 2021, at 9:35 am, Dino Farinacci wrote:
>
>> If we don't want to share a common transmission resource, then why do we
>> need globally unique addresses to use in IP packet headers? Locally unique
>> addresses would do just as well.
>
> Just to answer this question specifically. W
> But on the other hand, while what you say about economics is undoubtedly
> true, don't we want to keep the peer-to-peer option open *as a matter of
> principle*? After all, we still have that option for phone calls, even though
> it's now a minority usage pattern for mobile devices.
>
How m
> On 25 Jan 2022, at 6:19 pm, Dirk Trossen
> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Thanks for the great discussion, following our side meeting at IETF 112, so
> far.
>
> I wanted to turn the discussion to a key question which not only arose in the
> side meeting already but also in the discussions since,
> On 26 Jan 2022, at 5:17 am, Tom Herbert wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 3:38 AM Geoff Huston wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 25 Jan 2022, at 6:19 pm, Dirk Trossen
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> Tha
> On 26 Jan 2022, at 5:47 am, Stewart Bryant wrote:
>
> There is both a topological view of an address and a protocol view.
>
> The topological view is some place in the network, be that a node or an
> interface.
>
> The protocol view is that it is an instruction, for example to deliver the
> On 26 Jan 2022, at 5:24 pm, Eliot Lear wrote:
>
> [copy architecture-discuss]
>
> Geoff,
>
> This is a pretty good characterization. In fact, it's exactly where we went
> in the NSRG nearly 20 years ago, just after MO first kicked out 8+8. For
> people's reference, we looked at naming at
11 matches
Mail list logo
