Subject: [hybi] Framing (hybi Digest, Vol 30, Issue 69)

From: "Bob Gezelter" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 03:01:44 -0700

Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 20:44:32 +1000
From: Greg Wilkins <[email-masked]>
To: Hybi <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Framing Management Rationale
Message-ID:
<[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

>On 20 August 2011 06:38, Jamie Lokier <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
>> Greg Wilkins wrote:
>>> I do understand Andy's concern that max frame size might be wink to
>>> poor receiver implementations - so how about a third option: ?An
>>> optional header to declare min/max frame size, but remove the
>>> frame-too-large error so as to indicate that implementations must be
>>> able to handle any frame size up to their max message size limit.
>>
>> Who's min/max frame size goes in the header?
>> Intermediary 1, intermediary 2, or the end receiver?
>
>I totally agree that frame size should be hop by hop, so any min/max
>frame size received would only be applicable for the adjacent hop.
>
>cheers
>
>
>------------------------------