RE: Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo frames?

[Tim McKee <tim () baseworx net>]

I would hazard a guess that reducing the packet header overhead *and* the Ethernet interframe gap time by a factor of 6 
could make enough of an improvement to be quite noticeable when dealing with huge dataset transfers.

Tim McKee

-----Original Message-----
From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces () nanog org] On Behalf Of Jakob Heitz (jheitz)
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 18:21
To: Dale W. Carder
Cc: nanog () nanog org
Subject: RE: Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo frames?

Then it's mainly TCP slowstart that you're trying to improve?

Thanks,
Jakob.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:dwcarder () wisc edu]
> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 3:03 PM
> To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz () cisco com>
> Cc: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo frames?
>
> Thus spake Jakob Heitz (jheitz) (jheitz () cisco com) on Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 09:29:44PM +0000:
> > What's driving the desire for larger packets?
>
> In our little corner of the internet, it is to increase the 
> performance of a low number of high-bdp flows which are typically dataset transfers.
> All of our non-commercial peers support 9k.
>
> Dale

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.6189 / Virus Database: 4542/11829 - Release Date: 03/17/16