RE: [nsp] CEF stability

From: Martin, Christian (CMartin@mercury.balink.com)
Date: Tue Jan 25 2000 - 04:45:48 EST


I believe that sub-interface MTU settings are irrelevant - as Neil suggests,
they revert to the framer MTU which resides on the main interface. However,
some non-physical interfaces allow MTU settings, ie Virtual Templates and
BVIs. It seems that the SAR handleron ATM interfaces needs to carve PDU
buffers upon initialization, thus, dynamic MTU adjustment on a per-packet
basis may not be possible. This is ops experince, though - I don't work for
Cisco....

HTH,
-chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Neil J. McRae [mailto:neil@COLT.NET]
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2000 4:14 AM
To: Rafi Sadowsky
Cc: Neil J. McRae; Tony Tauber; Steve Meuse; Jim Warner;
cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
Subject: Re: [nsp] CEF stability

On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 11:11:23 +0200 (IST)
 Rafi Sadowsky <rafi@meron.openu.ac.il> wrote:

> on an ATM interface its probably better to enlarge the main interfaces MTU
> to (at least) the MTU on the sub-interface or strange things may happen

We have the main set at 1500 and the sub at 1500 works fine. having
a different MTU on the main and sub seems to force the subs to use
the main interface MTU.

Neil.

--
Neil J. McRae                             C O L T  I N T E R N E T
neil@COLT.NET



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:09 EDT