[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
MTU
- Subject: MTU
- From: Grzegorz at Janoszka.pl (Grzegorz Janoszka)
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2016 19:37:17 +0200
- In-reply-to: <CAP-guGUcE_wrbZdZX7rO2nN1GGREuqVrWfJ37CqY7MRLBZTTSw@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAPkb-7CRMNUK6Av-BBzUgMLh2YW0XfxDs4x4P4rJg6ookVNP=A@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7CTi_ekX35OcjdwqfM+W-gdkfkfpLsHXxhH5bVr=nyv3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7CnxtLuWWA+PDx2ba_xkaE54+Ei4NAbZp7TzvgdGi2Auw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7B3geM2iydgmidq+gFh4oJvzbCj_eznQSvLRhi3LGgvCA@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7C78wAAYrdfgZB65W=tJRumUb3qbVGVE1u28V7DTP82Ww@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7A1RsiN=tv6YuggARbUx2u8EDOUyHc__BJ6iB=UFWxs4Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7AQTQnuv9baaO=yEG0e+s0O1ppopafsCNoP8bSuCMysxg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7AXhoCrVnWv+pzbJGPW86mvzGmGuitqscqQ7AJFrriDRg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7BaGqybRDLRd01E65bmzoc-1ebnuYsEtYsSU8VLu5dp3A@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7BAjMO2sdY=87J6S6yd8oecyr1gyJa_jqaQUy7=XU0oAw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7A5TgL+dL8D48sccHSCVcHWEah9sv3hZT-7j=kN4aKnYQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7DtxSt=9vgBviZBSaxN57q=wkDJw+6m=RBmf01s9GtVXw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPkb-7AOoQ4=7cCuqwN96u-q5cBsr6q1aTnQ8sxW83LNqcjb2g@mail.gmail.com> <CAP-guGUcE_wrbZdZX7rO2nN1GGREuqVrWfJ37CqY7MRLBZTTSw@mail.gmail.com>
On 2016-07-22 15:57, William Herrin wrote:
> On a link containing only routers, you can safely increase the MTU to
> any mutually agreed value with these caveats:
What I noticed a few years ago was that BGP convergence time was faster
with higher MTU.
Full BGP table load took twice less time on MTU 9192 than on 1500.
Of course BGP has to be allowed to use higher MTU.
Anyone else observed something similar?
--
Grzegorz Janoszka
- Follow-Ups:
- MTU
- From: pr at isprime.com (Phil Rosenthal)
- MTU
- From: lukasz at bromirski.net (Łukasz Bromirski)
- MTU
- From: mark.tinka at seacom.mu (Mark Tinka)
- BGP & MTU
- From: jared at puck.nether.net (Jared Mauch)
- References:
- MTU
- From: baldur.norddahl at gmail.com (Baldur Norddahl)
- MTU
- From: bill at herrin.us (William Herrin)