Ethernet packet size and QinQ standard?
|
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
||||||||||
|
Posted by on December 8, 2009, 9:06 am
Please log in for more thread options
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
Please log in for more thread options On 08/12/09 15:06, Geert Jan de Groot wrote:  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
Please log in for more thread options wrote: 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
Please log in for more thread options 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 | ||||||||||
|
Posted by Rich Seifert on December 15, 2009, 5:52 pm
Please log in for more thread options wrote: 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 |
| Ethernet packet size and QinQ standard? | December 8, 2009, 9:06 am |
| More Than One Fiber Optic 100 Megabit Ethernet Standard? | June 30, 2007, 12:28 am |
| ethernet packet preamble | May 4, 2006, 2:01 pm |
| Ethernet Frame size | January 17, 2005, 8:01 pm |
| Bridges and ethernet multicast packet flooding? | August 7, 2010, 12:55 pm |
| Maximum size of Ethernet frame | November 11, 2004, 9:40 am |
| 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 |
| Can a standard NIC be triggered to send an electrical signal? | August 30, 2005, 8:28 am |
| Is there anybody here having IEEE's DSRC/WAVE 1609 standard documents? | February 20, 2008, 8:55 am |
| XGMII end of packet | July 20, 2004, 4:19 am |
| Generate packet with bad CRC | June 21, 2007, 9:15 am |
|
Home Cabling Guide
Finally, an instantly downloadable book that saves you thousands in home improvement dollars! Enjoy living in 21st century technology-advanced home while increasing its selling value and competitive advantage on the real estate market. Whether your cabling is for home office or high-tech leisure, you can wire your home yourself or learn "wirish" to speak with your cabling contractors in their language! Click Here to learn more |
> now to a size of 1522 bytes, to allow for the double .1Q fields?
> Are there any plans to go beyond this?