So looks like this may be a reason not to use UBNT stuff for our backup
links.  Looks like the highest I can set the MTU is 1515 on a couple units
and 1524 on another.  Neither capable of 1528 or more.

I'll have to find some brand new hardware and see if it can go higher.

How big of a performance hit are we talking here?  Potentially requiring
double the pps to move the same amount of large packets?  I could that
potentially being a pretty big problem.


On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 4:49 PM, Shayne Lebrun via Af <[email protected]> wrote:

> To my understanding, it works like this:
>
>
>
> Say you take an IP packet coming into ether1, and it’s full MTU; 1500
> bytes.
>
>
>
> Now, you want to bridge ether1 to an EoIP tunnel.  EoI is GRE, and there’s
> a 28 byte overhead for the GRE encapsulation.  Now you have a 1528 byte
> packet.
>
>
>
> Unless every device between that router and the EoIP endpoint has layer2
> MTUs of at least 1528 bytes, you’re going to transmit two packets to move
> that one original packet.  One packet will have something like 1472 bytes
> of the original packet, plus GRE overhead for 1500, and one will have the
> remaining 28 bytes of the original packet, plus 28 GRE overhead, so,
> something like 56 bytes.
>
>
>
> This introduces the obvious slowdowns, as well as not so obvious ones,
> like maybe you have a device in the middle that’s not so good at PPS.  Or
> that queues up small packets into one big air frame, and therefore you’re
> waiting for reassembly on the far end.
>
>
>
> Now, if you’re going from a 1500 byte LAN across a 9000 byte fiber
> connection, you’ll not notice this.  If you’re going to a satellite office
> behind DSL with PPPoE, or a cable modem, or whatever, you’re going to
> notice.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Kade Sullivan via
> Af
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 5:17 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
>
>
>
> Could you elaborate on this?  We have a couple EOIP links across "other"
> networks and have never adjusted the MTU anywhere.  I just pulled up the
> EOIP interfaces on each router and they are all set for 1500.  Should we be
> increasing this number as a best practice when building EOIP Tunnels?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Shayne Lebrun via Af <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> Bear in mind that unless you’ve increased your MTU from end to end, or
> dropped the MTU on your two devices that the EoIP are bridging, you’re
> going to get packet fragmentation.
>
>
>
> Otherwise, what RouterOS version?
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Erich Kaiser via
> Af
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 10, 2014 4:25 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [AFMUG] EoIP over fiber - high latency?
>
>
>
> So I have an EoIP tunnel setup over two fiber connections for a customer,
> I am seeing high latency over the tunnel any idea? MTU Issue?  Using
> RB1100AHx2 on both ends.
>
>
>

Reply via email to