Alan,
What Ethernet standard or even non-standard practice allows for the
transmission of frames larger than 8K? My understanding is that "Jumbo
Frames" is the only other initiative to address this issue. Am I missing
something big???
Regarding CPU utilization, I have seen the effects of gig Ethernet on CPU
utilization in a lab environment where we literally pound the server with
packets (ttcp, Chariot as test tools) and it isn't pretty! I'm not sure what
effect interrupt mitigation hardware does have or is supposed to have on
this utilization, but there still appears to be a major issue here.
If you are interested, I can point you to some public docs my company has
published that discuss test results of gig ethernet.
Thanks for the reply.
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Cox [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 10:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: What is better?
> If you want to compare gig Ethernet you need to first find a machine with
> enough CPU power to handle around 82,345 CPU interrupts per second - the
All the gig E cards have interrupt mitigation hardware. Also people going
for
bandwidth use >8K packets. 1.5K frames is for aggregation media usage.
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
