RE: ipoib-cm nits/clarifications
Dror Goldenberg <[email protected]> Thu, 20 Oct 2005 09:39:26 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipoib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --===============0697926306== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C5D549.65DDA7A2" This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C5D549.65DDA7A2 Content-Type: text/plain > From: Vivek Kashyap [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 7:21 PM > > - page 10, section 6.0 - what is the final MTU of a > connection ? is it > > the minimum between > > the two "receive MTU" , or is it hybrid - different MTU per half > > connection ? > > The receive MTU gives you the peer's minimum value. An > implementation can work this way. However, it might be useful > to state it as the minimum of the two in the draft..since an > implementation is likely to use the > the same size buffers when sending or receiving. That is if A > advt. recv of > 32K it will very likely send packets which are only 32K even > if the peer > send a receive MTU of 64K. > > thoughts? Sounds good to me. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C5D549.65DDA7A2 Content-Type: text/html <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII"> <META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2654.45"> <TITLE>RE: [Ipoverib] ipoib-cm nits/clarifications</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <BR> <BR> <P><FONT SIZE=2>> From: Vivek Kashyap [<A HREF="mailto:[email protected]">mailto:[email protected]</A>] </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 7:21 PM</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2>> > - page 10, section 6.0 - what is the final MTU of a </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> connection ? is it </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > the minimum between</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > the two "receive MTU" , or is it hybrid - different MTU per half </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> > connection ?</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> The receive MTU gives you the peer's minimum value. An </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> implementation can work this way. However, it might be useful </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> to state it as the minimum of the two in the draft..since an </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> implementation is likely to use the </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> the same size buffers when sending or receiving. That is if A </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> advt. recv of </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> 32K it will very likely send packets which are only 32K even </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> if the peer </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> send a receive MTU of 64K.</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=2>> thoughts?</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=2>Sounds good to me.</FONT> </P> </BODY> </HTML> ------_=_NextPart_001_01C5D549.65DDA7A2-- --===============0697926306== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ IPoverIB mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipoverib --===============0697926306==--