Re: #540: "jumbo" frames

In message <d5baf0349a844a90a7c19e7955ce3e60@BN1PR03MB072.namprd03.prod.outlook
.com>, Gabriel Montenegro writes:

>NYC interim discussions were very clear about not churning any more before
>WG LC unless something was completely broken.  We don't think that is the
>case here, especially as an extension would allow folks to experiment with
>jumbo frames for data if they so wish.

I beg to differ:  CONTINUATION is horribly broken.

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.

Received on Thursday, 26 June 2014 06:05:40 UTC