Re: MTU to CDN's

[George Michaelson <ggm () algebras org>]

if I was an ISP (Im not) and a CDN came and said "we want to be inside
you" (ewww) why wouldn't I say "sure: lets jumbo"

not even "asking for a friend" I genuinely don't understand why a CDN
who colocates and is not using public exchange, but is inside your
transit boundary (which I am told is actually a bit thing now) would
not drive to the packet size which works in your switching gear.

I understand that CDN/DC praxis now drives to cheap dumb switches, but
even dumb switches like bigger packets dont they? less forwarding
decision cost, for more throughput?

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 6:21 AM, Dovid Bender <dovid () telecurve com> wrote:
> Vincent,
>
> Thanks. That URL explained a lot.
>
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:11 AM, Vincent Bernat <bernat () luffy cx> wrote:
>
> >  ❦  8 janvier 2018 15:08 -0800, joel jaeggli <joelja () bogus com> :
> >
> > > > N00b here trying to understand why certain CDN's such as Cloudfare have
> > > > issues where my MTU is low. For instance if I am using pptp and the MTU
> > is
> > > > at 1300 it wont work. If I increase to 1478 it may or may not work.
> > > PMTUD has a lot of trouble working reliability when the destination of
> > > the PTB  is a stateless load-balancer.
> >
> > More explanations are available here:
> >  https://blog.cloudflare.com/path-mtu-discovery-in-practice/
> > --
> > Don't comment bad code - rewrite it.
> >             - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plauger)