I use MTU 9000* on all my router-to-router links because I need to be able to carry larger-than-1500-byte circuit traffic. If nothing else, circuit VLANs all need to be a bit over 1500 bytes on the outside (i.e. with my tags and possibly tags of other carriers involved) so that they are 1500 bytes on the inside. * Maybe I should/will-need-to change this to 9000 + a bit to allow for 9000 inside.
Ben Wiechman
Director of IP Strategy and Engineering
320.247.3224 | ben.wiechman@arvig.com
Arvig | 224 East Main Street | Melrose, MN 56352 | arvig.com
On 6/18/21 2:16 PM, Jonathan Stewart wrote:
Finally, views do differ, i'm sure others have opinions that do not match mine.
I don't see anything wrong in what you said. I'll add some detail on what we're doing in case it's helpful (or if someone can educate me if I'm doing something bad):
I use MTU 9000 on my transit connections, coordinated with the transit provider, because there seems to be no harm in doing that.
I use MTU 9000* on all my router-to-router links because I need to be able to carry larger-than-1500-byte circuit traffic. If nothing else, circuit VLANs all need to be a bit over 1500 bytes on the outside (i.e. with my tags and possibly tags of other carriers involved) so that they are 1500 bytes on the inside. * Maybe I should/will-need-to change this to 9000 + a bit to allow for 9000 inside.
I'm 1500 bytes at the customer edge for Internet. I'm also 1500 bytes at IXes.
-- Richard
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link:
http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link:
http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1