nanog mailing list archives
Re: TCP and WAN issue
From: Joe Abley <jabley () ca afilias info>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:43:19 -0400
On 27-Mar-2007, at 16:35, Joe Abley wrote:
You might take a look through RFC 2488/BCP 28, if you haven't already. The circuit propagation delays in that scenarios painted by that document are far higher than yours, but the principles are the same.
"... in *the* scenarios..." I am having trouble with words, today.
Current thread:
- TCP and WAN issue Philip Lavine (Mar 27)
- Re: TCP and WAN issue Joe Abley (Mar 27)
- Re: TCP and WAN issue Joe Abley (Mar 27)
- Re: TCP and WAN issue Roland Dobbins (Mar 27)
- Re: TCP and WAN issue Robert Boyle (Mar 27)
- Re: TCP and WAN issue JAKO Andras (Mar 27)
- RE: TCP and WAN issue michael.dillon (Mar 27)
- [no subject] Jim Shankland (Mar 27)
- RE: Jumbo frames michael.dillon (Mar 27)
- RE: Jumbo frames Jim Shankland (Mar 27)
- Re: Jumbo frames Andy Davidson (Mar 29)
- RE: Jumbo frames michael.dillon (Mar 29)
- Re: Jumbo frames Stephen Sprunk (Mar 30)
- [no subject] Jim Shankland (Mar 27)
- Re: TCP and WAN issue Joe Abley (Mar 27)