RE: RE: RE: Virutal Router MTU

2021-03-25 Thread Alex Mattioli
21 10:33 To: users@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:users@cloudstack.apache.org> Cc: users@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:users@cloudstack.apache.org>; d...@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:d...@cloudstack.apache.org> Subject: Re: RE: Virutal Router MTU Hi Alex, In our particular use case the Pub

RE: RE: Virutal Router MTU

2021-03-24 Thread Alex Mattioli
floor, News Building, London SE1 9SGUK @shapeblue -Original Message- From: Rafael del Valle Sent: 24 March 2021 10:33 To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: users@cloudstack.apache.org; d...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: RE: Virutal Router MTU Hi Alex, In our particular use

Re: RE: Virutal Router MTU

2021-03-24 Thread Rafael del Valle
Hi Alex, In our particular use case the Public Network is an SD WAN and we have a requirement of slightly smaller MTU than the standard 1500. I have assumed that our traffic will be encapsulated into something else before delivery, I guess that is the reason for the requirement. What would

RE: Virutal Router MTU

2021-03-24 Thread Alex Mattioli
Hi R, There's no ACS setting for the VR's MTU size. Unless you are running storage traffic s in that network then jumbo frames aren't of much use. I've ran some tests at the request of some customers in my previous job, and with some very busy VRs and the performance gains for an MTU of 9000