[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7C88852EF6F99F4EB538472FCFEBE2223A7E70ED@orsmsx509.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 15:25:39 -0700
From: "Zou, Yi" <yi.zou@...el.com>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>, Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"Leech, Christopher" <christopher.leech@...el.com>,
"Dev, Vasu" <vasu.dev@...el.com>,
"Love, Robert W" <robert.w.love@...el.com>,
"Ma, Steve" <steve.ma@...el.com>,
"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Subject: RE: Question regarding protocol specific mtu for FCoE
> > So FCoE cannot say "fcoe_mtu = min(OPTIMAL_FCOEMTU,netdev->mtu)" and
> > send-down frames based on that?
>
>I think the point is that FCoE wants to use OPTIMAL_FCOEMTU (2KB + a
>bit
>for headers) even when netdev->mtu is 1500. (eg datacenter network
>supports baby jumbo frames so FCoE traffic that stays within the
>network
>should use OPTIMAL_FCOEMTU, while lots of IP traffic is going out onto
>a
>1500-byte MTU campus and having TCP doing lots of PMTU discovery is a
>pain)
>
> - R.
Yes, exactly, thanks for the clarification. Also, since FC max payload
of 2112 is not going to change, I guess the OPTIMAL_FCOEMTU is probably
going to stay unchanged forever.
Thanks.
yi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists