[153778] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: IPv6 day and tunnels
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Templin, Fred L)
Tue Jun 12 13:21:16 2012
From: "Templin, Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@boeing.com>
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:19:39 -0700
In-Reply-To: <4FD72C3D.10709@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Masataka Ohta [mailto:mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 4:47 AM
> To: Templin, Fred L
> Cc: Owen DeLong; nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: Re: IPv6 day and tunnels
>=20
> Templin, Fred L wrote:
>=20
> > If you wish, you can also consider Alternate 3 for 9kB:
> > 72us@1Gbps, 7.2us@10Gbps, .72us@100Gbps, .072us@1Tbps.
>=20
> So?
>=20
> Have you learned enough about Moore's law that, at 10Gbps
> era, 72us of delay is often significant?
I frankly haven't thought about it any further. You say
1280+ belongs in ITU, and I say 1280- belongs in ATM.
Larger packets means fewer interrupts and fewer packets
in flight, which is good Moore's law or no. Accommodation
of MTU diversity is what matters.
Fred
fred.l.templin@boeing.com
> Masataka Ohta
