[29313] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: MAE-EAST Moving? from Tysons corner to reston VA.
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard A. Steenbergen)
Fri Jun 16 22:55:54 2000
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2000 22:46:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Richard A. Steenbergen" <ras@e-gerbil.net>
To: michael.dillon@gtsip.net
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0006162241160.95120-100000@pkitty.e-gerbil.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On 16 Jun 2000 michael.dillon@gtsip.net wrote:
> On Fri, 16 June 2000, "Richard A. Steenbergen" wrote:
>
> >In a public exchange point where you're talking to multiple networks
> >across a shared media it makes sense to do GigE, multiple GigE, 10GigE,
> >etc,
>
> What is the largest MTU that you can use across a GigE fabric?
I think this would be extremely foolhardy. The common number that all
those using jumbo frames should support is 9000 bytes (not 9k aka 9216).
This would probably need to be a condition of using GigE at the NAP,
in order to achieve any kind of common support, and you're eliminating
some vendor gige support (assuming their network can even carry the 9k
packets TO the nap without requiring even more work and possible
problems).
Has anyone tested these maximium sized jumbo frames with 802.1q vlan
tagging to see exactly how much (or how little) inter-vendor support
really exists?
--
Richard A Steenbergen <ras@e-gerbil.net> http://www.e-gerbil.net/humble
PGP Key ID: 0x138EA177 (67 29 D7 BC E8 18 3E DA B2 46 B3 D8 14 36 FE B6)
