[40796] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: Ethernet NAPs (was Re: Miami ...)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (RJ Atkinson)
Wed Aug 22 18:33:20 2001
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20010822182205.00a13540@10.30.15.2>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 18:27:06 -0400
To: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
From: RJ Atkinson <rja@inet.org>
Cc: Nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0108222214260.3920-100000@uplift.swm.pp.se>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
At 16:22 22/08/01, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
>You get your highend GigE switch, you set it to 4470 MTU. You use
>either 7200 with PA-GE, or GSR with 1GE (avoid 3GE here,
>2450 MTU doesn't cut it).
Maybe 4470, but some operators prefer ~9K. Different operators
might have different circumstances and hence different opinions.
If I were running an exchange point, I'd configure the exchange
switch for ~9K and leave the choice of MTU on the connecting device
up to my customers -- because that would maximise the potential
customer base and I am a capitalist.
Btw, some old GSR 1 GigE interfaces did not support anything above
IEEE-standard MTU. I infer from your note that there are now some
GSR interface cards that do support larger than IEEE-standard MTU.
I haven't used any of the supposed new cards, but deployed several
of the older ones that didn't support anything above IEEE-standard
MTU on GigE. Or maybe it was an IOS thing that changed in the
meantime.
Cheers,
Ran
rja@inet.org
