Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo frames?
tim at baseworx.net
Sat Mar 19 21:49:01 UTC 2016
The factor of 6 was just in reduction of overhead. Granted in the greater scheme of things the overall 4% is relatively insignificant, but there have been many times when doing multiple 10-100+GB transfers that I would have welcomed a 4% reduction of time spent twiddling thumbs!
From: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) [mailto:jheitz at cisco.com]
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2016 00:34
To: Tim McKee
Cc: Dale W. Carder; nanog at nanog.org
Subject: Re: Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo frames?
You would hardly notice it.
Helium is 4 times as heavy as hydrogen, but only marginally less buoyant.
1500: 1500/1578 = 95%
9000: 9000/9078 = 99%
That's 4% better for a TCP packet, not 600%.
> On Mar 18, 2016, at 6:45 PM, Tim McKee <tim at baseworx.net> wrote:
> I would hazard a guess that reducing the packet header overhead *and* the Ethernet interframe gap time by a factor of 6 could make enough of an improvement to be quite noticeable when dealing with huge dataset transfers.
> Tim McKee
> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces at nanog.org] On Behalf Of Jakob Heitz
> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 18:21
> To: Dale W. Carder
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: RE: Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo frames?
> Then it's mainly TCP slowstart that you're trying to improve?
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dale W. Carder [mailto:dwcarder at wisc.edu]
>> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 3:03 PM
>> To: Jakob Heitz (jheitz) <jheitz at cisco.com>
>> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
>> Subject: Re: Internet Exchanges supporting jumbo frames?
>> Thus spake Jakob Heitz (jheitz) (jheitz at cisco.com) on Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 09:29:44PM +0000:
>>> What's driving the desire for larger packets?
>> In our little corner of the internet, it is to increase the
>> performance of a low number of high-bdp flows which are typically dataset transfers.
>> All of our non-commercial peers support 9k.
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2015.0.6189 / Virus Database: 4542/11829 - Release Date:
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.6189 / Virus Database: 4542/11841 - Release Date: 03/19/16
More information about the NANOG