Re: [gentoo-user] Re: NFS vs. jumbo frames

2007-04-24 Thread Matthias Bethke
Hi Francesco, on Monday, 2007-04-23 at 21:58:18, you wrote: > Based on my experience I would add to verify also the upper MTU value > really supported. According to Documentation/networking/e1000.txt, the adapters should all support 16K frames. The limiting factor would be the switch's 9K limit,

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: NFS vs. jumbo frames

2007-04-23 Thread Fabio Correa
You can also fiddle with the rsize, wsize NFS mount parameters. -- Fabio A. Correa D. Physics Dept, Universidad Nacional, Bogota, Colombia [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] My webpage and OpenPGP key at http://facorread.150m.com My alexandria.cc address is not availa

[gentoo-user] Re: NFS vs. jumbo frames

2007-04-23 Thread Francesco Talamona
On Monday 23 April 2007, kashani wrote: > Tony Stohne wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Uwe Thiem said the following on 2007-04-23 17:53: > >> Just curious: What kind of network (layer 2) is this that allows > >> an MTU of 9000? > >> > >> Uwe > > > > It sounds lik

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: NFS vs. jumbo frames

2007-04-23 Thread Uwe Thiem
On 23 April 2007, ames wrote: > kashani badapple.net> writes: > > >> Just curious: What kind of network (layer 2) is this that allows an > > >> MTU of 9000? > > >> Uwe > > > > > > It sounds like Gigabit Ethernet to me. > > > > Keep in mind that not all fastE or gigE switches support jumbo frames.

[gentoo-user] Re: NFS vs. jumbo frames

2007-04-23 Thread ames
kashani badapple.net> writes: > >> Just curious: What kind of network (layer 2) is this that allows an MTU of > >> 9000? > >> Uwe > > It sounds like Gigabit Ethernet to me. > Keep in mind that not all fastE or gigE switches support jumbo frames. > Additionally not all cards support jumbo fra