From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <52DF6D2B.2070304@meshcoding.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 08:03:07 +0100 From: Antonio Quartulli MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1390299725-1873-1-git-send-email-antonio@meshcoding.com> <86mwipch0u.fsf@coulee.tdb.com> <86lhy8pn5v.fsf@coulee.tdb.com> In-Reply-To: <86lhy8pn5v.fsf@coulee.tdb.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="q0jqShQwbOouqED6n3eOqBnC9F2AnQN74" Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH maint] batman-adv: fix soft-interface MTU computation Reply-To: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Russell Senior , The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --q0jqShQwbOouqED6n3eOqBnC9F2AnQN74 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 22/01/14 07:04, Russell Senior wrote: >>>>>> "Russell" =3D=3D Russell Senior writes= : >=20 >>>>>> "Antonio" =3D=3D Antonio Quartulli writes= : > Antonio> The current MTU computation always returns a value smaller > Antonio> than 1500bytes even if the real interfaces have an MTU large > Antonio> enough to compensate the batman-adv overhead. >=20 > Antonio> Fix the computation by properly returning the highest > Antonio> admitted value. >=20 > Antonio> Signed-off-by: Antonio Quartulli --- >=20 > Russell> This seems to fix the bat0-MTU-unnecessarily-small problem I > Russell> observed last night and reported on the IRC channel. I > Russell> haven't actually passed any traffic over it yet, but the > Russell> interface is up with the expected MTU value with the patch. >=20 > Antonio> This patch is missing a Reported-by clause because I did not > Antonio> have "russell"'s email address at hand. >=20 > Russell> Reported-by: Russell Senior >=20 > Followup, as requested, I tried setting a smaller MTU (1400) on the > adhoc0 interface. When fragmentation was enabled, this resulted in no > change to MTU (still 1500) for bat0. When I disabled fragmentation, > the bat0 MTU dropped, as expected, to 1368. Interestingly, the MTU on > the bridge that bat0 was a member of remained 1500 despite the lower > bat0 MTU. Should that be? >=20 I don't really know how the bridge code behaves. As far as I remember it should adapt to the smallest MTU. But thanks for testing! This shows that the patch is working fine ;) --=20 Antonio Quartulli --q0jqShQwbOouqED6n3eOqBnC9F2AnQN74 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJS320wAAoJEEKTMo6mOh1V7+QP/jOOtbgu6Rz5OJl/l5WT9ZoW a9ZEOpzvQa3sY+zX6rdS1Fg5vtlmjtdGBR9XRkzrJLOrumuOMcCzcNZiMmeFf6v8 c9HqdXLDY54GZKQFbQAhq4n9/Diuug2Aw83WcrkBqTQuay9YKQFHaCHL/vhoGSej BlGTqJHZPCfcHGVvWTXnXbp/scOY7GCgmXnjRNs7KFPls6MqRiPS+ZW4HTJeCBmX BqfwbEtKM2S2aGrapjfrjfYEN7nUS99XpV3PJUSkOZrHTx3cFnoX8SYGovqYJ3d0 xg57EZkX8ByzuWZLMNi6LEtEQ8Tr6epHI6X+0/tYVsK0krEwNbVTJKl5TmWc8WsT VKiVrU2n+BGOwO6ZZLoFk0/ap/FUjhA1Hzp/LX41HuHbZ+zTUbFymrTZgS9DOvdR DsXj4mBuW8ySAyThol+zkZ/y3IzKoF/9vmoimZ5Wn5UEhR8BEcpdqdahslBYWB9D zEJ0WNLQh+vgDpmRGEKI4F/HgqOata8PyQFKock6NThriNBTeG9JE9THFTpZ5/fE VEC8DLoI9YOlbLSbMNp7oB/4zmSwfaBbstqRzx0Oqf0De9bgBsxWrqcD+Gmm4Bki Jv8UIguMxyh8tNCNep5MWIQLwu6ZrNbSa1nJduEKHWIs2c28uTTLawFFxAlvqVze x/cosXSu+bv2AIJ50z9J =HNTc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --q0jqShQwbOouqED6n3eOqBnC9F2AnQN74--