[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[NANOG] Larger packets to save power, was: Re: would ip6 help us safeing energy ?
- Subject: [NANOG] Larger packets to save power, was: Re: would ip6 help us safeing energy ?
- From: nanog at daork.net (Nathan Ward)
- Date: Tue, 6 May 2008 12:07:13 +1200
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <036801c8aeea$2166e1b0$cb998647@ws20031> <[email protected]>
On 6/05/2008, at 8:02 AM, Iljitsch van Beijnum wrote:
> Of course not. Like I said, as an average end-user with 10 Mbps you
> get to send a maximum of 2500 packets per second. That's plenty to do
> VoIP, set up TCP sessions or do IM. You just don't get to send the
> full 10 Mbps at this size.
Hmm, I see value in that.
But, good luck trying to convince customers to take a pps limitation
in addition to a Mbps limitation, whether they ever exceed that pps or
not. You /might/ convince them to take a pps limitation only - but if
they want to do 30Mbit (ie 2500pps @ 1500b) then your product needs to
support that.
Maybe you just start calling "10Mbps" "10Mbps, assuming a 500b average
packet size."
Anyway, nice idea in theory - putting more real world limitations in
to sold product limitations - but I don't see it working out with
marketing people, etc. unless someone has been doing it for years
already. It'd be good if the world were all engineers though, huh?
--
Nathan Ward