|Thread Links||Date Links|
|Thread Prev||Thread Next||Thread Index||Date Prev||Date Next||Date Index|
Looking at the article on Jumbo frames that you referenced at http://sd.wareonearth.com/~phil/jumbo.html, it includes the statement:
“while the number of packets larger than 1500 bytes appears small, more than 50% of the bytes were carried by such packets because of their larger size.”
However, when you look at the source of this information (reference 1), what it actually says is:
“over half of the bytes are carried in packets of size 1500 bytes or larger”
This is, of course, totally different. As the red curve of figure 3b of http://www.caida.org/publications/papers/1998/Inet98/Inet98.html shows, it is the 1500 byte packets that contain ~ 55% of the bytes in the analysis and in fact the total number of bytes in all packets above 1500 is a negligible percentage of the total.
Nortel Networks UK Limited,
External +44 1279 402540 Fax +44 1279 405670 ESN 742 2540
From: Marcus Duelk [mailto:duelk@xxxxxxxxxx]
Don't jumbo frames increase latency in links where there is store and forward?
Data Optical Networks Research
Crawford Hill HOH R-237
fon +1 (732) 888-7086
fax +1 (732) 888-7074