[132182] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: mtu question
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Nov 17 12:24:41 2010
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim5o-vWL35+ttk0VfxPscPR81KSSi=_f3+3Bc0Z@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 09:22:43 -0800
To: Deric Kwok <deric.kwok2000@gmail.com>
Cc: nanog list <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I think that the MTU on LO is pretty irrelevant in general.
If it does matter, larger is probably better.
Owen
On Nov 17, 2010, at 9:08 AM, Deric Kwok wrote:
> Hi
>
> I just see that the mtu in lo is different from standard eth 1500
>
> Any meaning of it?
>
> eg:
> Standard eth 1500
>
> in linux. lo mtu 16436
>
> in solaris. lo mtu is 8232
>
> How about cisco / juniper loopback?
>
> Thank you so much
