MTU of the Internet?

Mailman List Mirror (Read Only)
1

Eric Osborne writes:

The problem with anything Microsoft may put forth is that it'll read
like "576 is good. It is the best. We do it. So should everybody.
If 576 is good, all else must be bad." And that's simply not the
case.

I must admit that I'm very worried about what will happen to the
internet if they do this. Why?

This will effectively triple the number of packets that routers have
to do processing on, that's why.

Frankly, the whole thing is stupid. I didn't say this earlier, but
Microsoft has about the most abominable stacks out there. Their boxes
STILL don't handle recieving fragmented packets correctly (a
requirement of the RFCs!) and they have a host of flaws. I wish they'd
get their act together.

Perry

2

perry@piermont.com (Perry E. Metzger) writes:

This will effectively triple the number of packets that routers have
to do processing on, that's why.

The intent is right, but the result here is wrong. Unfortunately, 1500
byte packets are rare. About 6.9% of the traffic (by packet). Yes, it
would triple that fragment of the traffic. However, that would not affect
the other (much more common) packet sizes in the distribution.

If you wanna worry about the number of packets in the net, worry about the
40 byte packets. Dem's da killas. :wink:

Tony

3

Packets going through our border routers have an average packet size
in the region of 200 to 250 bytes. How would this triple the average
packet size?