nanog mailing list archives
Re: Inter-exchange media types
From: jon () branch com (Jon Zeeff)
Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 11:12:58 -0400 (EDT)
smaller packets than they otherwise could. Some hosts get noticeably higher performance when they are able to use FDDI- sized packets compared to Ethernet-sized packets, and restricting the packet size to 1500 bytes will put a limit on the maximum
Some hard figures on this would be interesting. Ie, % of packets with > 1500 MTU, % performance degradation if fragmented, etc. I suspect that other backbone design issues (like congestion) dominate any fragmentation issue. I'm not sure a few people trying to get a little extra throughput should dictate the design of a NAP (unless they want to pay for it). - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Jeremy Porter (Apr 30)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Havard . Eidnes (May 03)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Jon Zeeff (May 03)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Havard . Eidnes (May 03)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Paul A Vixie (May 03)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Jeremy Porter (May 03)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Mike O'Dell (May 04)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Jon Zeeff (May 04)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Curtis Villamizar (May 06)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Jon Zeeff (May 03)
- Re: Inter-exchange media types Havard . Eidnes (May 03)