[14998] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: MTU of the Internet?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Eric Osborne)
Thu Feb 5 01:50:27 1998
From: Eric Osborne <osborne@notcom.com>
To: phil@charon.milepost.com (Phil Howard)
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 01:37:33 -0500 (EST)
Cc: marcs@znep.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <199802050250.UAA22032@charon.milepost.com> from "Phil Howard" at Feb 4, 98 08:50:45 pm
>
> > There are all sorts of people spouting all sorts of lies around Windows
> > newsgroups about why small MTUs are good; I think novice users are simply
> > getting drawn in by supposed experts.
>
> Such as?
>
I don't think it's an issue of lies about why small MTUs are good, but the
fact that if joe random user is told "576 is good", then they assume that
anything different is _bad_. We all know that there's good reasons for all
sorts of different MTUs, mainly because of the different types of traffic you
could have - there's always going to be a tradeoff between efficient transfer
of large blocks of data and immediaecy (sp?) of response time. The problem with
anything Microsoft may put forth is that it'll read like "576 is good. It is
the best. We do it. So should everybody. If 576 is good, all else must be
bad." And that's simply not the case.
eric
