[67151] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Strange public traceroutes return private RFC1918 addresses
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Petri Helenius)
Tue Feb 3 13:42:01 2004
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2004 20:40:22 +0200
From: Petri Helenius <pete@he.iki.fi>
To: Niels Bakker <niels=nanog@bakker.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20040203160300.GB58055@snowcrash.tpb.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
Niels Bakker wrote:
>* pete@he.iki.fi (Petri Helenius) [Tue 03 Feb 2004, 15:42 CET]:
>
>
>>Me wonders why people ask for 40 byte packets at linerate if the mtu
>>is supposedly larger?
>>
>>
>
>Support for the worst-case scenario. Same why you spec support for
>a BIGINT-line ACL without excessive impact on forwarding capacity.
>
>
>
Why large MTU then? Most modern ethernet controllers don´t care if
you´re sending
1500 or 9000 byte packets. (with proper drivers taking advantage of the
features there)
If you´re paying for 40 byte packets anyway, there is no incentive to
ever go beyond 1500
byte MTU.
Pete
