[lkml]   [2001]   [Feb]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: MTU and 2.4.x kernel
    > > I ran DNS reliably over AX.25 networks. They have an MTU of 216. They work.
    > 512 is maximal message size, which is transmitted without troubles,
    > hardwired to almost all the datagram protocols.

    Message size != MTU. DNS doesnt use DF. In fact DNS can even fall back to

    > > > B. Accoutning, classification, resource reervation does not work on
    > > > fragmented packets.
    > > Thats a bug in accounting classification and resource reservation.
    > Sorry? It is bug in client mtu selection. Functions above are impossible
    > on fragmented packet even in theory. And because of A, if client uses mtu
    > 296, it cannot use 100% of emerging and existing IP functions.

    Tragic. You are required to accept existing realities and degrade nicely.

    > > Over a 9600 mobile phone link mtu 296 makes measurable differences to the
    > > latency when mixing a mail fetch with typing.
    > It is myth. Changing mtu until ~4K does not affect latency, it stays on 4K/bw.

    Please tell that to my phone.

    > > Over a radio link where
    > > error rate causes exponential increases in probability of packet loss as
    > Another myth. All they do error correction and have so high latency,
    > that _increasing_ mtu only helps. And helps a lot.

    No. There is large amounts of real world hardware that this is not true for.
    You cannot do good FEC on a narrow band link.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.021 / U:5.324 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site