Re: Problem with e100.c and packets >mtu in 2.6.4

[Glen Turner <glen.turner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> What is the reason behind this check? Could it be removed from the
> official sources again?

Alternatively, I'd like to suggest that too-big frames
be discarded by all drivers.

The configuration described (an inconsistent MTU in
a subnet) is wrong and having it fail-and-count rather
than subtly "work" (eg, frames up to some hardware-dependent
magic number are received but can't be sent, but frames
beyond that don't) is a significant help to network
operators.

Those operators then just need to know the RFCs, not
the inner details of the popular NICs and their drivers.

-- 
Glen Turner         Tel: (08) 8303 3936 or +61 8 8303 3936 
Network Engineer          Email: glen.turner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Australian Academic & Research Network   www.aarnet.edu.au