Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 10:22:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: "Louis A. Mamakos" <louie@TransSys.COM> Cc: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@plutotech.com>, freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: what's the best working gigabit ether card... Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9908261022070.996-100000@semuta.feral.com> In-Reply-To: <199908261718.NAA05996@whizzo.transsys.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > > Another thing to keep in mind, if you're going to be connecting more than > > two machines, is that the Alteon switches are the only ones that I've seen > > that currently claim to do jumbo frames. They cost a bundle, but they're > > more or less the only game in town. My guess is that will change > > eventually. > > Packet Engines is also doing jumbo sized Gigabit ethernet in their > switches. This was something that was a requirement at work (UUNET) > since the backbone already carries 4470 bytes frames, and we didn't > want to have to fragment going over gigabit ethernet plumbing. > > You might also check around for an Internet Draft recently published > on how to encapsulate jumbo-sized frames. This can be problematic > for some protocols that use SNAP encapsulation since the ethernet > type field is used as a length; this normally isn't a problem since > the lengths were smaller then the range of ethernet types assigned. With > jumbo frames, this is no longer true. > > In our case, this came up in the context of encapsulating CLNS frames > on the wire. This is used commonly on ISP backbones that run Integrated > IS-IS routing protocol as their IGP. > Cool, thanks all. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hardware" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9908261022070.996-100000>