[c-nsp] ospf database size - affects that underlying transport mtu might have
Gert Doering
gert at greenie.muc.de
Fri Dec 1 11:21:47 EST 2017
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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 630 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20171201/f22d72ea/attachment.sig>
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list