Re: [nsp] CEF stability

From: Neil J. McRae (neil@COLT.NET)
Date: Tue Jan 25 2000 - 04:13:36 EST

Next message: Martin, Christian: "RE: [nsp] CEF stability"
Previous message: Rafi Sadowsky: "Re: [nsp] CEF stability"
In reply to: Rafi Sadowsky: "Re: [nsp] CEF stability"
Next in thread: Martin, Christian: "RE: [nsp] CEF stability"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:11:23 +0200 (IST)
Rafi Sadowsky <rafi@meron.openu.ac.il> wrote:

> on an ATM interface its probably better to enlarge the main interfaces MTU
> to (at least) the MTU on the sub-interface or strange things may happen

We have the main set at 1500 and the sub at 1500 works fine. having
a different MTU on the main and sub seems to force the subs to use
the main interface MTU.

Neil.

--
Neil J. McRae                             C O L T  I N T E R N E T
neil@COLT.NET

Next message: Martin, Christian: "RE: [nsp] CEF stability"
Previous message: Rafi Sadowsky: "Re: [nsp] CEF stability"
In reply to: Rafi Sadowsky: "Re: [nsp] CEF stability"
Next in thread: Martin, Christian: "RE: [nsp] CEF stability"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:09 EDT