Guys,
Does it really matter! Nobody is arguing that applications SHOULD send packets
larger than the MTU in order to improve performance.
At best, they are arguing that a few outliers (LTP, NFSv2, iPERF) do.
Ron
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ole Troan <otr...@employees.org>
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 12:46 PM
> To: Joe Touch <to...@strayalpha.com>
> Cc: Christian Huitema <huit...@huitema.net>; Ron Bonica
> <rbon...@juniper.net>; int-area <int-area@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [Int-area] draft-ietf-intarea-frag-fragile-03
>
>
>
> > On 30 Nov 2018, at 18:33, Joe Touch <to...@strayalpha.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Nov 30, 2018, at 9:22 AM, Ole Troan <otr...@employees.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> On 30 Nov 2018, at 16:49, Joe Touch <to...@strayalpha.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> 1) the lower down the fragmentation occurs, the less overhead is
> >>> needed (i.e., when performance is an issue, it’s even more important
> >>> to fragment as low as possible)
> >>
> >> That sounds like an unfounded myth.
> >> I would think it highly dependent on implementation.
> >
> > Reality:
> >
> > - every layer down you do it avoids a layer of header in-between *at
> > every fragment* ie., IP fragments have only ONE UDP header and ONE
> application header, but app-fragments have multiples of both.
> >
> > Do the math.
>
> Every ipv6 fragment has an additional 8 byte header. But the network might
> not be the bottleneck here, and a few more bytes might not matter. As I said
> it
> depends.
> When it comes to performance making blanket statements is rarely a good
> idea.
>
> Ole
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
Int-area@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
