Re: Comparing an old flow snapshot with some packet size data

Paul Ferguson <pferguso@cisco.com> Thu, 08 August 1996 20:45 UTC

Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa21124; 8 Aug 96 16:45 EDT
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa21120; 8 Aug 96 16:45 EDT
Received: from murtoa.cs.mu.OZ.AU by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14292; 8 Aug 96 16:45 EDT
Received: from mailing-list by murtoa.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.6.9/1.0) id GAA13408; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 06:35:58 +1000
Received: from munnari.OZ.AU by murtoa.cs.mu.OZ.AU (8.6.9/1.0) with SMTP id GAA13387; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 06:27:50 +1000
Received: from lint.cisco.com by munnari.OZ.AU with SMTP (5.83--+1.3.1+0.56) id UA26539; Fri, 9 Aug 1996 06:27:48 +1000 (from pferguso@cisco.com)
Received: from pferguso-pc.cisco.com (c1robo14.cisco.com [171.68.13.14]) by lint.cisco.com (8.6.12/CISCO.SERVER.1.1) with SMTP id NAA12772; Thu, 8 Aug 1996 13:27:33 -0700
Message-Id: <199608082027.NAA12772@lint.cisco.com>
X-Sender: pferguso@lint.cisco.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 1996 16:26:22 -0400
To: Andrew Partan <asp@partan.com>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@ietf.org
From: Paul Ferguson <pferguso@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: Comparing an old flow snapshot with some packet size data
Cc: jhawk@bbnplanet.com, kwe@6sigmanets.com, big-internet@munnari.oz.au
Precedence: bulk

Well, one would think that the answer hinges on the life-expectancy
of FDDI, as opposed to higher-speed media (giagbit-ethernet?)....

- paul

At 03:58 PM 8/8/96 -0400, Andrew Partan wrote:

>This is all interesting stuff.
>
>One question that I have been trying to figure out is 
>	What size MTU should an ISP support on its backbone?
>
>If we view the future where lots of hosts are connected via ethernet
>and fast ethernet & the like, then a MTU of 1500 would be 'correct'.
>
>If we think that the future will have lots of hosts connected via
>Fddi or similar, then a MTU of 4470 would be 'better'.
>
>Any ideas?
>	--asp@partan.com (Andrew Partan)
>