Re: [j-nsp] Best practice MTU?

On 04/27/2012 12:33 AM, Chris Kawchuk wrote: I usually set the interface physical MTU as high as it goes (per device), but manually set protocol inet to MTU 1500 (for things like We do almost this (physical - max), but set IP MTU to 9100 rather than default 1500. The latter is helpful if you

Re: [j-nsp] SRX3600 and NAT

James, Thanks for your answer. I didn't write my question clear, though. I'm looking for the amount of entries that can be supported by NAT policies, e.g. one million flows can be NATed. Thanks, Tomas On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 10:46 PM, James S. Smith jsm...@windmobile.ca wrote: This is from

Re: [j-nsp] Best practice MTU?

On 4/26/2012 4:32 PM, OBrien, Will wrote: We've been pushing out jumbo frames across our new core lately. Right now I've got multiple boxes from multiple vendors that all support different maximum MTUs. Example: Juniper MX960/480, Nexus 7009, Nexus 5k/2k, Catalyst 4900, Nortel/Avaya

Re: [j-nsp] Best practice MTU?

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 07:40:43AM -0500, Eric Helm wrote: On 4/26/2012 4:32 PM, OBrien, Will wrote: We've been pushing out jumbo frames across our new core lately. Right now I've got multiple boxes from multiple vendors that all support different maximum MTUs. Example: Juniper