Strange public traceroutes return private RFC1918 addresses

Petri Helenius pete at he.iki.fi
Tue Feb 3 19:53:30 UTC 2004


Stephen J. Wilcox wrote:

>>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.
>>    
>>
>
>I think its partially due to removal of overhead and improvements you get out of 
>TCP (bearing in mind it uses windowing and slow start)
>
>  
>
Sure, if you control both endpoints. If you don´t and receivers have 
small (4k,8k or 16k) window
sizes, your performance will suffer.

Maybe we should define if we´re talking about record breaking attempts 
or real operationally
useful things here.

Pete




More information about the NANOG mailing list