[67126] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Strange public traceroutes return private RFC1918 addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bill)
Tue Feb 3 10:06:04 2004
From: bill <bmanning@karoshi.com>
To: pete@he.iki.fi (Petri Helenius)
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 06:54:39 -0800 (PST)
Cc: bmanning@karoshi.com (bill), tbaranski@mail.com (Terry Baranski),
Michael.Dillon@radianz.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <401FB2CF.3050302@he.iki.fi> from "Petri Helenius" at Feb 03, 2004 04:40:15 PM
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> bill wrote:
>
> > for some, yes. running 1ge is fairly common and 10ge is
> > maturing. bleeding edge 40ge is available ... and 1500byte
> > mtu is -not- an option.
> >
> Me wonders why people ask for 40 byte packets at linerate if the mtu is
> supposedly
> larger?
>
> Pete
got me... although I could fabricate a rational.
40 byte packets @ 40Gig is a wonder to contemplate.
the whole ATM argument (53byte "cells" over 100Meg)
being an egregious overhead expense for segmentation/
reassembly is amplified here.
--bill
