MTU

Saad Abdullah saad17621 at gmail.com
Fri Jul 22 14:48:08 UTC 2016


Worth reading this on choosing MTU on transit link.

http://blog.apnic.net/2014/12/15/ip-mtu-and-tcp-mss-missmatch-an-evil-for-network-performance/

-Sad



>>
>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Baldur Norddahl <
>> baldur.norddahl at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> What is best practice regarding choosing MTU on transit links?
>>>
>>> Until now we have used the default of 1500 bytes. I now have a project
>>> were
>>> we peer directly with another small ISP. However we need a backup so we
>>> figured a GRE tunnel on a common IP transit carrier would work. We want
>>> to
>>> avoid the troubles you get by having an effective MTU smaller than 1500
>>> inside the tunnel, so the IP transit carrier agreed to configure a MTU of
>>> 9216.
>>>
>>> Obviously I only need to increase my MTU by the size of the GRE header.
>>> But
>>> I am thinking is there any reason not to go all in and ask every peer to
>>> go
>>> to whatever max MTU they can support? My own equipment will do MTU of
>>> 9600
>>> bytes.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, none of my customers will see any actual difference
>>> because they are end users with CPE equipment that expects a 1500 byte
>>> MTU.
>>> Trying to deliver jumbo frames to the end users is probably going to end
>>> badly.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Baldur
>>>
>>
>>
>



More information about the NANOG mailing list