If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by on December 8, 2009, 9:06 am
A normative question:
AS we all know, ethernet has a max packet size of 1514 bytes:
14 bytes header (dst + src + len/type), plus 1500 bytes data.
For 802.1Q tagging, the spec was changed to allow a max packet size
of 1518 bytes: 1514 bytes, plus 4 bytes for the .1Q type/tag/prio fields.
For QinQ tagging, has the base spec been changed again,
now to a size of 1522 bytes, to allow for the double .1Q fields?
Are there any plans to go beyond this?
I'm kind of surprized because some hardware does have the packet size
hard-coded in, and while a careful study was done when the first
packet size change was made, changing this again and again may cause
trouble and I'd like to understand the rationale behind this.
(and no, jumbograms isn't the answer - suppose you have hardware which
is capable of 9kB packets, the same hardware may not be capable to carry
9kB+2bytes needed for .1Q, or 9kB+4bytes for QinQ protocols)
Thanks,
Geert Jan
|
|
Posted by Chris Hills on December 11, 2009, 3:22 pm
On 08/12/09 15:06, Geert Jan de Groot wrote:
> For QinQ tagging, has the base spec been changed again,
> now to a size of 1522 bytes, to allow for the double .1Q fields?
> Are there any plans to go beyond this?
The relevant standard is 802.1ad, aka "Amendment to IEEE 802.1Q-2005.
IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks—Virtual Bridged
Local Area Networks—Revision—Amendment 4: Provider Bridges"
http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.1ad-2005.pdf
However, the maximum ethernet packet size was not changed from 1518 so
it is currently out of spec to provide an end-user MTU of 1500 using
Q-in-Q (as I understand it).
Work was started on 802.3as to expand the maximum frame size to 2000
bytes (support for 802.1ad being one of the objectives) but it seems to
have stalled. Given the vast install-base of ethernet equipment it seems
unlikely such a change would be worthwhile.
|
|
Posted by Stephen on December 11, 2009, 6:05 pm
wrote:
>On 08/12/09 15:06, Geert Jan de Groot wrote:
>> For QinQ tagging, has the base spec been changed again,
>> now to a size of 1522 bytes, to allow for the double .1Q fields?
>> Are there any plans to go beyond this?
>The relevant standard is 802.1ad, aka "Amendment to IEEE 802.1Q-2005.
>IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks—Virtual Bridged
>Local Area Networks—Revision—Amendment 4: Provider Bridges"
>http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.1ad-2005.pdf
>However, the maximum ethernet packet size was not changed from 1518 so
>it is currently out of spec to provide an end-user MTU of 1500 using
>Q-in-Q (as I understand it).
>Work was started on 802.3as to expand the maximum frame size to 2000
>bytes (support for 802.1ad being one of the objectives) but it seems to
>have stalled. Given the vast install-base of ethernet equipment it seems
>unlikely such a change would be worthwhile.
there is probably a difference between the minimum constraint the
standards require and the stuff deployed in some networks.
However adding more 4 byte "wrappers" in an Ethernet frame is becoming
common - at least in a carrier environment.
every MPLS label adds 4 bytes, so for a typical carrier MPLS VPN
service you need 2 levels, with more for various add ons such as fast
reroute.
At work the switches are set to allow 3 or 4 levels of MPLS label -
and they flow through the L2 Ethernet switches that glue everything
together OK (Cisco with non default max size set).
Also the Ethernet access tails deployed for MPLS use Q in Q.
801.q customer traffic is sent across a "multi service" bearer, where
an extra layer of 802.1q tags are used to segregate different services
from each other + management.
then there is all the malarky about large packet - where the actual
maximum sze depends on the vendor + equipment + blade type....
--
Regards
stephen_hope@xyzworld.com - replace xyz with ntl
|
|
Posted by Marris on December 15, 2009, 4:31 pm
no it hasnt stalled, 802.3as was ratified. I am pretty sure you'll find it
included in 802.3-2008.
The frame length was increased to 2000 but the payload remains the same at
1500. The extra is to allow for every sort of encapsulation that may be
needed in the future
> On 08/12/09 15:06, Geert Jan de Groot wrote:
>> For QinQ tagging, has the base spec been changed again,
>> now to a size of 1522 bytes, to allow for the double .1Q fields?
>> Are there any plans to go beyond this?
> The relevant standard is 802.1ad, aka "Amendment to IEEE 802.1Q-2005.
> IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks-Virtual Bridged
> Local Area Networks-Revision-Amendment 4: Provider Bridges"
> http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.1ad-2005.pdf
> However, the maximum ethernet packet size was not changed from 1518 so
> it is currently out of spec to provide an end-user MTU of 1500 using
> Q-in-Q (as I understand it).
> Work was started on 802.3as to expand the maximum frame size to 2000
> bytes (support for 802.1ad being one of the objectives) but it seems to
> have stalled. Given the vast install-base of ethernet equipment it seems
> unlikely such a change would be worthwhile.
|
|
Posted by Rich Seifert on December 15, 2009, 5:52 pm
wrote:
> no it hasnt stalled, 802.3as was ratified. I am pretty sure you'll find i=
t
> included in 802.3-2008.
> The frame length was increased to 2000 but the payload remains the same a=
t
> 1500. The extra is to allow for every sort of encapsulation that may be
> needed in the future
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
The original 1500 byte Ethernet frame was *intended* to carry 1K bytes
of payload. The additional 476 bytes was for "every sort of
encapsulation that may be needed in the future." Of course, folks took
the entire field for the payload, and so 28 years later we had to
expand the frame for the encapsulation.
Let's see if we have to do it again in 2036.
--
Rich Seifert Networks and Communications Consulting
21885 Bear Creek Way
(408) 395-5700 Los Gatos, CA 95033
(408) 228-0803 FAX
Send replies to: usenet at richseifert dot com
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | More Than One Fiber Optic 100 Megabit Ethernet Standard? | June 30, 2007, 12:28 am |
| ethernet packet preamble | May 4, 2006, 2:01 pm |
| Cigarette Pack Size Ethernet Bridges? | September 13, 2006, 2:45 pm |
| min size for VLAN tagged ethernet frame | November 2, 2006, 4:45 am |
| why ethernet paload minimum size is 46 bytes? | March 29, 2007, 7:55 am |
| standard for auto-negotiation | May 24, 2007, 12:57 pm |
| Crossover function in the standard. | June 23, 2008, 4:34 pm |
| how much size is enough ? | May 25, 2006, 6:45 pm |
| Can a standard NIC be triggered to send an electrical signal? | August 30, 2005, 8:28 am |
| MII preamble size | February 14, 2008, 12:46 pm |
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML site map
> now to a size of 1522 bytes, to allow for the double .1Q fields?
> Are there any plans to go beyond this?