nanog mailing list archives
Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet
From: Randy Bush <randy () psg com>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 13:35:50 -1000
One of my customers comments that he doesn't care about jumbograms of 9K or 4K - what he really wants is to be sure the networks support MTUs of at least 1600-1700 bytes, so that various combinations of IPSEC, UDP-padding, PPPoE, etc. don't break the real 1500-byte packets underneath.
nice to have smart customers!
Current thread:
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet, (continued)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Simon Leinen (Apr 13)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Fred Baker (Apr 13)
- 1500 does not work: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Peter Dambier (Apr 14)
- Re: 1500 does not work: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Marshall Eubanks (Apr 14)
- Re: 1500 does not work: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Petri Helenius (Apr 14)
- Re: 1500 does not work: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Marshall Eubanks (Apr 15)
- Re: 1500 does not work: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Petri Helenius (Apr 15)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Fred Baker (Apr 13)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Simon Leinen (Apr 13)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Douglas Otis (Apr 14)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Iljitsch van Beijnum (Apr 14)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Bill Stewart (Apr 14)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Randy Bush (Apr 14)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Stephen Sprunk (Apr 14)
- Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet Douglas Otis (Apr 14)