North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Thoughts on increasing MTUs on the internet
On (2007-04-12 16:28 +0200), Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote: > > On 12-apr-2007, at 16:04, Gian Constantine wrote: > > >I agree. The throughput gains are small. You're talking about a > >difference between a 4% header overhead versus a 1% header overhead > >(for TCP). > > 6% including ethernet overhead and assuming the very common TCP > timestamp option. Out of curiosity how is this calculated? [[email protected] ~]% echo "1450/(1+7+6+6+2+1500+4+12)*100"|bc -l 94.27828348504551365400 [[email protected] ~]% echo "8950/(1+7+6+6+2+9000+4+12)*100"|bc -l 99.02633325957070148200 [[email protected] ~]% I calculated less than 5% from 1500 to 9000, with ethernet and adding TCP timestamp. What did I miss? Or compared without tcp timestamp and 1500 to 4470. [[email protected] ~]% echo "1460/(1+7+6+6+2+1500+4+12)*100"|bc -l 94.92847854356306892000 [[email protected] ~]% echo "4410/(1+7+6+6+2+4470+4+12)*100"|bc -l 97.82608695652173913000 Less than 3%. However, I don't think it's relevant if it's 1% or 10%, bigger benefit would be to give 1500 end-to-end, even with eg. ipsec to the office. -- ++ytti
|