[67121] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Strange public traceroutes return private RFC1918 addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bill)
Tue Feb 3 09:37:58 2004
From: bill <bmanning@karoshi.com>
To: tbaranski@mail.com (Terry Baranski)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:28:55 -0800 (PST)
Cc: Michael.Dillon@radianz.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <000001c3ea60$24843530$0200000a@pleth0ra> from "Terry Baranski" at Feb 03, 2004 08:15:13 AM
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>
>
> > A more important question is what will happen as we move out
> > of the 1500 byte Ethernet world into the jumbo gigE world. It's
> > only a matter of time before end users will be running gigE
> > networks and want to use jumbo MTUs on their Internet links.
>
> The performance gain achieved by using jumbo frames outside of very
> specific LAN scenarios is highly questionable, and they're still not
> standardized. Are "jumbo" Internet MTUs seen as a pressing issue by
> ISPs and vendors these days?
>
> -Terry
for some, yes. running 1ge is fairly common and 10ge is
maturing. bleeding edge 40ge is available ... and 1500byte
mtu is -not- an option.
--bill
