From: Petr Lapukhov (petrsoft@gmail.com)
Date: Wed May 31 2006 - 05:38:01 ART
AFAIK no. Fragmentation decision is based solely on packet size.
Nothing else will affect it :) So the good away to keep you data
unfragmented, is to compress them.
The other possible way may be to change IP MTU at interface to some very low
value, so that packets are "fragmented" at L3 :)
HTH
Petr
2006/5/31, Koen Zeilstra <koen@koenzeilstra.com>:
>
> So that's more an avoid scenario than a conditional fragmentation
> scenario, I guess?
>
> Conditional fragmentation is not possible?
>
> -----------------------
> One good reason why computers can do more work than people is that they
> never have to stop and answer the phone.
>
> On Wed, 31 May 2006, Petr Lapukhov wrote:
>
> | Koen,
> |
> | You can try "frame-relay ip rtp header compression"
> |
> | That will shrink voice packets from average 60, to 20+, and
> | will help them avoid fragmentation.
> |
> | HTH
> | Petr
> |
> | 2006/5/31, Koen Zeilstra <koen@koenzeilstra.com>:
> | >
> | > Hi group,
> | >
> | > Suppose I want to use frame-relay fragmentation and use fragments of
> 60.
> | > However voice traffic should not be fragemented at all. How is this
> | > achieved?
> | >
> | > A service policy under a FR can select more options however
> fragmentation
> | > is not part of the policy-map options.
> | >
> | > On DocCD I found frame-relay ip rtp priority. Hoever in my opionion
> this
> | > is a queueing strategy and not excluding traffic from being
> fragemented.
> | >
> | > thanks in advance for your answer,
> | >
> | > Koen
> | >
> | >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> | > Subscription information may be found at:
> | > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> |
> | _______________________________________________________________________
> | Subscription information may be found at:
> | http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 01 2006 - 06:33:22 ART