From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: netfilter@interlinx.bc.ca Subject: Re: disturbing MTU experiment Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:46:58 -0400 Sender: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org Message-ID: <20030408204658.GD24451@pc.ilinx> References: <20030408154101.13919.89741.Mailman@kashyyyk> <16018.64600.149601.372694@isis.cs3-inc.com> <20030408174753.GA8158@pc.ilinx> <20030408184051.GB14357@oknodo.bof.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="llIrKcgUOe3dCx0c" Return-path: To: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030408184051.GB14357@oknodo.bof.de> Errors-To: netfilter-devel-admin@lists.netfilter.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org --llIrKcgUOe3dCx0c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 08:40:51PM +0200, Patrick Schaaf wrote: >=20 > They are increasingly common. Of course, this is the corect answer. I was thinking about the link at the other end, but of course, that is irrelevant. > PPPoE DSL links run at 1496, Right. > and all kinds > of tunneling results in even smaller MTU, e.g. 1454 for maximally > conservative L2TP links. Right. > http://mss.phildev.net/ That's the one I was thinking of! > http://lartc.org/howto/lartc.cookbook.mtu-mss.html And this is a very workable (even though it's a band-aid to fix other people's brokenness) solution. b. --=20 Brian J. Murrell --llIrKcgUOe3dCx0c Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+kzVCl3EQlGLyuXARAne0AKCFjLqg7GO5IdKF7IU570SgNjTZAgCffonC 8L1pv/Rf/ilNTBypUH9E3ps= =Jciq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --llIrKcgUOe3dCx0c--