RE: Comments on WIMP and MTU Handling

["marcelo bagnulo" <mbagnulo@ing.uc3m.es>]

Hi Margaret,

[...]

> If you choose the second option, though, there is no advantage to
> mechanisms that try to avoid the need to add a header (such as the
> special next header values used in NOID).

I am not sure i understand this argument...
i mean, if you present a reduced mtu to the upper layers, but the additional
header is not included, you are actually sending less bytes, which means
that you are consuming less bandwidth, so others can use it.

so i do see a benefit on this approach, since you are saving some bandwidth

am i missing something?

regards, marcelo