Talk:Maximum transmission unit

Moved
Moved because MTU is a TLA, and half the references were to MTU Aero Engines.

PPoE rarely used?
I found the MTU of 1492 for PPoE and the note rarely used interesting. Is it refereing to PPoE being rarely used or the 1492? I thought PPoE is still fairly common for DSL. When I set up my DSL connection something that was recommended to me was to set the MTU to 1492 on the router to maximize the connection / to ensure full compatibility. I don't know enough to make a proper edit but perhaps the note needs to be updated or PPoE given it's own section? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.139.63 (talk) 00:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


 * "Rarely used" comment was removed at some point. ~Kvng (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Maximum transmission unit. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111226003507/http://support.3com.com/infodeli/tools/switches/ss3/management/ug/cli_mg6a.htm to http://support.3com.com/infodeli/tools/switches/ss3/management/ug/cli_mg6a.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Bad archive but this source is lo longer used in the article. ~Kvng (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

IP and Ethernet MTU
So, in order to perhaps shed some light on the IP vs. Ethetnet MTU confusion, I added the section "IP and Ethernet MTU". Please don't just delete it as this is a major problem for lots of networking engineers out there. If you see a problem with the section, modify and discuss here! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fb35523 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 30 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I edited it heavily. The section is now It was hard to get through with multiple terminology definitions, tangentials and awkward sentence structure. There were also some unsupported statements. Let me know what you think of the new version. ~Kvng (talk) 15:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

reference it or fix it
"Smaller MTU values can reduce network delay."

This appears to be have been added by someone with no understanding of how routers work.

Smaller MTU values will cause more larger packets to be chopped up then reassembled. This will not reduce network delay. If you reduced your MTU and it fixed delay, then most likely you have just resolved a conflict between incompatible MTU settings on various hardware components. MTU will never increase the size of small packets, but will cause a delay while it breaks up larger packets. Someone please justify and reference this sentence or remove it. I'm getting sick of fielding tech support from people trying to reduce lag who are messing with their routers for no good reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.65.67.223 (talk) 07:25, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Please add new section at the bottom. If you have a problem with uncited text please add a tag (citation needed). Reducing the MTU doesn't necessarily cause or increase fragmentation, but of course more packets would need to be transmitted, reducing efficiency. --Zac67 (talk) 07:40, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Short description
changed the short description of this article from "Size of the largest network layer protocol data unit that can be communicated in a single network transaction" to "Size measurement in computer networking"

I reverted because I felt the new description was now no longer descriptive of the topic. It no longer indicates the size of what it is measuring. It's also not a measurement but a limit. MichaelMaggs restored my revert claiming their description is correct. I assume the motivation for the change is to make the description shorter. If that's the case, may I suggest "Size of largest allowed packet on a network segment" ~Kvng (talk) 18:03, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

is a better description than "Largest allowed network segment packet" which strikes me as shortened for the sake of being short but is definitely better than your first cut so if that's the necessary compromise, so be it.
 * @Kvng, Indeed, as stated in my edit summary the intent is to reduce the length to no more than about 40 characters per WP:SDSHORT, and to avoid attempting to define the subject, per WP:SDNOTDEF. Any improved wording that meets those criteria is fine. Your suggestion is too long at 51 characters, but perhaps "Largest allowed network segment packet", which is says essentially the same and is only 38 characters, would work. MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:32, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:SDSHORT says be short – no more than about 40 characters (but this can be slightly exceeded if necessary). I think "Size of largest allowed packet on a network segment"
 * In general, I see a lot of existing short descriptions on technical articles that are (much) longer than 40 characters. I'm afraid we're going to do some serious damage if we try to shorten all of these. So I am inclined to revert description changes that are shorter but at the expense of being more difficult to understand. I have put Wikipedia talk:Short description on my watchlist to monitor wider discussion. If you can point me to any previous discussion that might help me understand the thinking here, I would appreciate it. ~Kvng (talk) 18:52, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Size measurement in computer networking doesn't work. I'm seconding Size of largest allowed packet on a network segment – still longer than 40 chars but hard to shorten further. Largest allowed network segment packet doesn't work either. Network segment packet seems to refer to the largest possible L2 frame size which MTU is not about (it's the largest frame's SDU, not the PDU itself). --Zac67 (talk) 04:22, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've started a central discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Short_description ~Kvng (talk) 15:45, 20 June 2022 (UTC)