RE: Reopening jumbo frames in IS-IS

["Manfredi, Albert E" <albert.e.manfredi at boeing.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Hinden [mailto:bob.hinden at nokia.com] 
> 
> p.s. I also find it ironic that in the other side of the 
> house there are 
> folks who think 53 byte packets are ideal :-)

Hmmm. Didn't someone recently mention that going to biiger MTUs than
1500 would cause potential jitter problems, as longer frames got in
queues with shorter ones?

Quoting:

"I can't speak for IEEE, but the reasons usually brought up include  
implementation costs in terms of buffer depths, and mutual jitter  
between competing traffic streams. If you have a session that sends a  
packet every 20 ms and depends on that being mostly maintained,  
having another session send packets that are 30 ms long and can get  
several into the queue ahead of you can be a real pain."

Seems like this is where the 48-byte crowd was coming from too, although
they wanted to be able to go up and down in link speed without having to
change the size of the "frame."

;)

Bert