Re: [NANOG] Larger packets to save power, was: Re: would ip6 help us safeing energy ?

• Previous message: Nathan Ward: "Re: [NANOG] OSPF minutia, and, technote publication venues"
• Maybe in reply to: Iljitsch van Beijnum: "[NANOG] Larger packets to save power, was: Re: would ip6 help us safeing energy ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

On Tue, May 06, 2008, Nathan Ward wrote:

> 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?

NPE-XXX, anyone?

Adrian

_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list

http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog

• Previous message: Nathan Ward: "Re: [NANOG] OSPF minutia, and, technote publication venues"
• Maybe in reply to: Iljitsch van Beijnum: "[NANOG] Larger packets to save power, was: Re: would ip6 help us safeing energy ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]