[95966] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Keegan.Holley@sungard.com)
Thu Apr 12 11:50:05 2007
In-Reply-To: <4BC9B966-6370-4ABC-9FA2-F80C5CF0B44F@muada.com>
To: NANOG list <nanog@merit.edu>
From: Keegan.Holley@sungard.com
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 11:34:43 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 005593BC852572BB_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I think it's a great idea operationally, less work for the routers and
more efficient use of bandwidth. It would also be useful to devise some
way to at least partially reassemble fragmented frames at links capable of
large MTU's. Since most PC's are on a subnet with a MTU of 1500 (or 1519)
packets would still be limited to 1500B or fragmented before they reach
the higher speed links. The problem with bringing this to fruition in the
internet is going to be cost and effort. The ATT's and Verizons of the
world are going to see this as a major upgrade without much benefit or
profit. The Cisco's and Junipers are going to say the same thing when
they have to write this into their code plus interoperability with other
vendors implementations of it.
Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>
Sent by: owner-nanog@merit.edu
04/12/2007 05:20 AM
To
NANOG list <nanog@merit.edu>
cc
Subject
Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet
Dear NANOGers,
It irks me that today, the effective MTU of the internet is 1500
bytes, while more and more equipment can handle bigger packets.
What do you guys think about a mechanism that allows hosts and
routers on a subnet to automatically discover the MTU they can use
towards other systems on the same subnet, so that:
1. It's no longer necessary to limit the subnet MTU to that of the
least capable system
2. It's no longer necessary to manage 1500 byte+ MTUs manually
Any additional issues that such a mechanism would have to address?
--=_alternative 005593BC852572BB_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I think it's a great idea operationally,
less work for the routers and more efficient use of bandwidth. It
would also be useful to devise some way to at least partially reassemble
fragmented frames at links capable of large MTU's. Since most PC's
are on a subnet with a MTU of 1500 (or 1519) packets would still be limited
to 1500B or fragmented before they reach the higher speed links. The
problem with bringing this to fruition in the internet is going to be cost
and effort. The ATT's and Verizons of the world are going to see
this as a major upgrade without much benefit or profit. The Cisco's
and Junipers are going to say the same thing when they have to write this
into their code plus interoperability with other vendors implementations
of it.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td width=40%><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com></b>
</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: owner-nanog@merit.edu</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">04/12/2007 05:20 AM</font>
<td width=59%>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">To</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">NANOG list <nanog@merit.edu></font>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">cc</font></div>
<td>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<div align=right><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Subject</font></div>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet</font></table>
<br>
<table>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td></table>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2><br>
Dear NANOGers,<br>
<br>
It irks me that today, the effective MTU of the internet is 1500 <br>
bytes, while more and more equipment can handle bigger packets.<br>
<br>
What do you guys think about a mechanism that allows hosts and <br>
routers on a subnet to automatically discover the MTU they can use <br>
towards other systems on the same subnet, so that:<br>
<br>
1. It's no longer necessary to limit the subnet MTU to that of the <br>
least capable system<br>
<br>
2. It's no longer necessary to manage 1500 byte+ MTUs manually<br>
<br>
Any additional issues that such a mechanism would have to address?<br>
<br>
<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
--=_alternative 005593BC852572BB_=--
