Re: Strange public traceroutes return private RFC1918 addresses

[Petri Helenius <pete () he iki fi>]

Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:

> > Why large MTU then? Most modern ethernet controllers don´t care if you´re
> > sending 1500 or 9000 byte packets. (with proper drivers taking advantage of
> > the features there) If you´re paying for 40 byte packets anyway, there is no
> > incentive to ever go beyond 1500 byte MTU.
> >    
>
> I think its partially due to removal of overhead and improvements you get out of 
> TCP (bearing in mind it uses windowing and slow start)
>
>  
Sure, if you control both endpoints. If you don´t and receivers have 
small (4k,8k or 16k) window
sizes, your performance will suffer.

Maybe we should define if we´re talking about record breaking attempts 
or real operationally
useful things here.

Pete