[105991] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Avg. Packet Size - Again?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jeff Kell)
Wed Jul 16 09:32:12 2008
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:32:41 -0400
From: Jeff Kell <jeff-kell@utc.edu>
To: nanog <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <487DDEBF.2080106@psg.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
As Valdis stated earlier:
> I predict that if you graph it, there's a ton of packets that are right
> around the MTU of the network. almost equal number of tiny packets carrying
> the ACK's of the mobygrams, and then a small noise level of "everything else".
That's pretty much the case for the last decade. Way back when the
"net" had more telnet and "terminal based things" the numbers were
skewed to the left, but you can hardly say "Hello World" in
HTTP/HTML/XML/CSS/Ajax/Javascript these days in under a megabyte :-)
Sample from our border:
> UTC-Edge#sho ip cache flow
> IP packet size distribution (1566M total packets):
> 1-32 64 96 128 160 192 224 256 288 320 352 384 416
> 448 480
> .000 .412 .120 .022 .010 .003 .004 .002 .002 .001 .001 .003 .001
> .001 .001
>
> 512 544 576 1024 1536 2048 2560 3072 3584 4096 4608
> .005 .001 .003 .027 .371 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
versus our core:
> UTC-Core#sho ip cache flow
> IP packet size distribution (22714M total packets):
> 1-32 64 96 128 160 192 224 256 288 320 352 384 416
> 448 480
> .000 .453 .073 .022 .011 .052 .069 .045 .011 .005 .009 .013 .020
> .007 .001
>
> 512 544 576 1024 1536 2048 2560 3072 3584 4096 4608
> .001 .001 .001 .009 .188 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000
But those are fairly stock IPv4, no jumbos, plain-jane ethernet numbers.
Jeff
