On Fri, Feb 23, 2001 at 02:24:35PM +1300, Stephen Donnelly wrote:
Ethernet also only gets about 50% efficiency for small packets though, if you include the IFG. Cisco POS does better, with only 4 bytes header per packet (plus a start byte and 2 to end), but I think there's a minimum frame size there too in practice that would lower the efficiency slightly. POS also has to do byte stuffing, as it's basically HDLC.
Yeah There will be a minimum frame size but because the frame is able to grow to fit almost all payload types, it doesn't suffer from the atm pathological case where you have overflowed the cell by one byte and you need a whole new cell. I might actually pump some internet style (tm) traffic over some oc3's to see the difference. Dean --------- To unsubscribe from nznog, send email to majordomo(a)list.waikato.ac.nz where the body of your message reads: unsubscribe nznog