[29355] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Jumbo Frames (was Re: MAE-EAST Moving? from Tysons corner toreston
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Marc Slemko)
Mon Jun 19 13:09:49 2000
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 10:06:21 -0700 (PDT)
From: Marc Slemko <marcs@znep.com>
To: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <010401bfda0e$8d0eadd0$eaaf6cc7@PEREGRIN>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0006191002390.1490-100000@bluefish.go2net.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> I should have re-caveated, for your benefit. I am not testing
> with a bazillion-byte file. I am testing with query/response
> against a RDBMS host. IOW, a typically real-world(tm) practical
> application. The responses range from 3-50KB, with anomalies out
> to 100KB. The slow-start algorithm has been identified as the
Erm... no, then your problem is opening and closing TCP connections all
the time. Don't do that. It hurts you in a lot of other ways.
It really isn't appropriate to go around saying "you need larger MTUs to
fill a 100 meg link, period" when you really mean "in one particular
situation where I am opening and closing TCP connections and only sending
a very small amount of data over each, you need larger MTUs".
I wouldn't be so quick to say slow start is useless, either. Perhaps with
small window sizes, but as soon as they get big enough...
