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