Re: [SIG-IX] Jumbo Frames on IX

[Kurt Erik Lindqvist <kurtis@kurtis.pp.se>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



	Raphael,

On 10 nov 2008, at 08.23, Raphael Ho wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>
> Thanks for your feedback on my last email regarding v4/v6 on the  
> exchange. We’re rolling out the route-servers and IPv6 addresses on  
> Equinix Exchanges across Asia (Singapore, Tokyo, Sydney and HK), so  
> if anybody needs a port or an address, please feel free to let me  
> know.
>
> Now for another poll – on our new exchange in Hong Kong...
>
> 1. Is there value in enabling Jumbo Frames on the exchange?
>
> 2. If yes, what sized Jumbo frame do you want?
> a) 1600 (baby giant)
> b) 4470 (legacy MTU of FDDI, now default for POS links)
> c) 9180 (RFC1209)
> d) Other (please specify)
>
> My personal concern is that there may be router/switch  
> compatibilities – some people’s equipment may not support jumbo  
> frames of any kind and cause potential issues (although chances are,  
> most endpoint traffic is still 1500bytes these days – maybe life  
> will be different in a few years when GPON brings fiber to  
> everybody’s home). However, the world will be so much more efficient  
> with a larger MTU.

At the Netnod exchanges in Sweden, we have been running two VLANs at  
each location, one for MTU1500 and one for MTU4470. The ISPs that then  
want to exchange MTU4470 can do so, and can prefer those sessions over  
MTU1500. This seem to have worked fine for the 6 years we have had it  
in operation, and almost all connect to both VLANs and prefer the 4470  
VLAN.

Best regards,

- - kurtis -



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin)

iEYEARECAAYFAkkZRHgACgkQAFdZ6xrc/t4YPACaAqiLY1S9431G6Tiew1msaEIQ
M6MAoMQ+AQZ7djGt26orHkuY+71L7IVU
=NnfN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----