678870d8   
   From: barmar@alum.mit.edu   
      
   In article   
   <9521372e-20ca-4959-8f87-4a3ca6e56ec9@j11g2000vbi.googlegroups.com>,   
    Albert Manfredi  wrote:   
      
   > On Nov 28, 1:58 pm, Barry Margolin  wrote:   
   > > In article   
   > > <90812451-96fa-49b2-bdcd-698229d2d...@z10g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,   
   > >  David Schwartz  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > On Nov 28, 12:49 am, Barry Margolin  wrote:   
   > >   
   > > > > But MSS should still apply.   
   > >   
   > > > Why?   
   > >   
   > > > DS   
   > >   
   > > Why not?  Where does RFC 793 say that a sender is allowed to ignore the   
   > > MSS option depending on the link layer?  Although MSS is normally used   
   > > to keep segments under the link layer MTU, it could have other uses.   
   >   
   > I agree. I can see why the Ethernet MTU would not apply, in loopback,   
   > but the TCP MSS is higher (in the protocol stack) than all of that,   
   > and as far as I can tell, is still in effect. Did the MSS become   
   > renegotiated during the session?   
      
   I don't think MSS can be renegotiated, it's only supposed to be sent   
   with the SYN packets.  Someone correct me if I'm wrong.   
      
   --   
   Barry Margolin, barmar@alum.mit.edu   
   Arlington, MA   
   *** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)