🚀 go-pugleaf

robelr@ucs.indiana.edu (Allen Robel) writes:

>> anyway?  At 64 bytes/packet that's ~90% of an ethernet.  I would 
>Opps, actually only about 75% (14531 X 64 X 8 bits) but still...

Your 90% was closer, if not an under estimate, add 9 us per packet
for inter-frame gap, and you get another 13%, then add the preamble
bits, and you get more ...

I think the original implied that this was the maximum rate that they
could transmit at, so its probably as close to 100% actual utilisation
of the wire as you can get with packets that small.

As to its relevance ... none at all, while complete ethernet utilisation
is possible, its not rational with packets that small.   You want your
router to be able to handle a full ethernet at 1024 byte (and greater)
packet sizes, but if a net is flodded with baby packets its probably
a feature that most of the things are discarded.

kre