RINA - scott whaps at the nanog hornets nest :-)

George Bonser gbonser at seven.com
Sun Nov 7 02:24:03 CST 2010


> 
> On Sun, 7 Nov 2010, George Bonser wrote:
> 
> > I guess you didn't read the links earlier.  It has nothing to do
with
> > stack tweaks.  The moment you lose a single packet, you are toast.
> And
> 
> TCP SACK.
> 
> I'm too tired to correct your other statements that lack basis in
> reality
> (or at least in my reality).

But the point being, why should everyone have to be forced into making
multiple tweaks to their stacks to accommodate a worst case when a
single change (and possibly a change in total buffer size) is all that
is needed to get improved performance globally?  With modern PMTUd that
is nearly globally supported at this point, it just isn't as big of an
issue as it was, say, 5 years ago.

It isn't that big of an issue but it does seem to be a very inexpensive
change that offers a large benefit.

It will happen on its own as more and more networks configure internally
for larger frames and as more people migrate out of academia where 9000
is the norm these days into industry.






More information about the NANOG mailing list