From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Fragment large datagrams even when IP_HDRINCL is set. Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2016 18:33:13 +0900 Message-ID: <5757E659.9070501@miraclelinux.com> References: <1464013425-31129-1-git-send-email-alan.davey@metaswitch.com> <20160531.113913.1477085966766110028.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: hideaki.yoshifuji@miraclelinux.com, "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru" , "jmorris@namei.org" , "yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org" , "kaber@trash.net" To: Alan Davey , David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com ([209.85.220.41]:33347 "EHLO mail-pa0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423745AbcFHJdS (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jun 2016 05:33:18 -0400 Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id ec8so967730pac.0 for ; Wed, 08 Jun 2016 02:33:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Please do not use "top-posting" here. Alan Davey wrote: > Hi David > > Thank you for your email. I understand raw IP sockets have worked this way for a long time, but I think that there is real benefit in this patch for little risk. Please take a look at the following and let me know what you think. > > - The current behaviour is counter-intuitive (fragmentation takes place in all other cases) and therefore different to what everyone expects. I do NEVER expect fragmentation occurs with IP_HDRINCL, at least. -- Hideaki Yoshifuji Technical Division, MIRACLE LINUX CORPORATION