[150294] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Common operational misconceptions
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Masataka Ohta)
Mon Feb 20 22:38:27 2012
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 12:37:07 +0900
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
To: George Bonser <gbonser@seven.com>
In-Reply-To: <596B74B410EE6B4CA8A30C3AF1A155EA09CD7431@RWC-MBX1.corp.seven.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
George Bonser wrote:
> I, in fact, HAVE read the RFC.
You don't, at all.
> The initial value for search_high SHOULD be the largest possible
> packet that might be supported by the flow. This may be limited by
> the local interface MTU, by an explicit protocol mechanism such as
> the TCP MSS option, or by an intrinsic limit such as the size of a
> protocol length field.
It is a section on "search_high", while your question in your
previous mail was on "eff_pmtu":
>> First, it sets eff_pmtu to 1400B. OK?
> Where did you get 1400 from?
Note that rest of your mail also contains a lot of
misunderstandings on the RFC. But, as you don't read
the RFC, collecting them is a waste of time.
Read the RFC thoroughly again and again, 10 times a day
for 30 days. Then, I may reply your further questions if
asked off list.
PERIOD.
Masataka Ohta
