What is the tradeoff between fragmenting packets into shorter fragments compared to using longer fragments?

What is the tradeoff between fragmenting packets into shorter fragments compared to using longer fragments?

• A. Shorter fragments always improve throughput with no downsides.
• B. There is no tradeoff; all fragment sizes behave the same.
• C. Shorter fragments have lower probability of errors from interference but require more error correction.
• D. Shorter fragments increase the probability of errors due to interference.

Answer: (C)

Fragment size creates a tradeoff between how vulnerable each fragment is to interference and how much overhead you pay to send many fragments. Shorter fragments spend less time on the air, so the likelihood that a single fragment gets corrupted by interference is lower. That makes each fragment more robust to random noise or brief interference events. But sending many small fragments means more header data and more total transmissions to deliver the complete packet. This increases overhead and the amount of error-control work you must do across all fragments (more chances for a fragment to fail and require retransmission). So while each fragment is less likely to be corrupted, the system has to handle more fragments overall, which can require more error correction or retransmission effort. That balance is the essence of the tradeoff. The other options miss this balance: making fragments shorter isn’t always better for throughput because extra headers and retransmissions can negate gains; all fragment sizes don’t behave identically; and shorter fragments don’t typically increase the chance of interference—in fact, they usually reduce it.

Fragment size creates a tradeoff between how vulnerable each fragment is to interference and how much overhead you pay to send many fragments. Shorter fragments spend less time on the air, so the likelihood that a single fragment gets corrupted by interference is lower. That makes each fragment more robust to random noise or brief interference events.

But sending many small fragments means more header data and more total transmissions to deliver the complete packet. This increases overhead and the amount of error-control work you must do across all fragments (more chances for a fragment to fail and require retransmission). So while each fragment is less likely to be corrupted, the system has to handle more fragments overall, which can require more error correction or retransmission effort. That balance is the essence of the tradeoff.

The other options miss this balance: making fragments shorter isn’t always better for throughput because extra headers and retransmissions can negate gains; all fragment sizes don’t behave identically; and shorter fragments don’t typically increase the chance of interference—in fact, they usually reduce it.