[c-nsp] ospf database size - affects that underlying transport mtu might have

[Clint Wade]

Potential for dropping a large routing update as well causing inconsistent
route tables and missing routes.

On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 10:21 AM, Gert Doering <gert at greenie.muc.de> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 01:34:23PM -0600, Aaron Gould wrote:
> > Cisco tac didn't want to do ignore-mtu
>
> And right they are.  "Have OSPF come up, and then drop payload data
> frames because the lower layer cannot transport full size packets"
> is about the worst you can do to your customer data :-)
>
> gert
> --
> now what should I write here...
>
> Gert Doering - Munich, Germany
> gert at greenie.muc.de
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>