[190615] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: packet loss question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Sean Donelan)
Tue Jul 12 03:27:48 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 03:25:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sean Donelan <sean@donelan.com>
To: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160711190417.GG2543@vinny.peecee3.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Mon, 11 Jul 2016, cpolish@surewest.net wrote:
> Thanks for identifying the source, I wish more people did this.
> My nitpick is that RFC791 doesn't label MTU=68 as "standard";
> it says (section 3.2, p.25):
RFC791 was written during the internet's anti-standard era.
We reject: kings, presidents and voting. We believe in: rough consensus
and running code
