From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Florian Westphal Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: ip_finish_output_gso: If skb_gso_network_seglen exceeds MTU, do segmentation even for non IPSKB_FORWARDED skbs Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 11:06:16 +0200 Message-ID: <20160709090616.GC2067@breakpoint.cc> References: <1467722132-10084-1-git-send-email-shmulik.ladkani@ravellosystems.com> <20160705130327.GA10737@breakpoint.cc> <20160705170541.3f210675@pixies> <20160708.231206.2103933109393316831.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: shmulik.ladkani@ravellosystems.com, fw@strlen.de, edumazet@google.com, hannes@stressinduktion.org, shmulik.ladkani@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc ([80.244.247.6]:36040 "EHLO Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932860AbcGIJG0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jul 2016 05:06:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160708.231206.2103933109393316831.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: David Miller wrote: > From: Shmulik Ladkani > Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 17:05:41 +0300 > > > On Tue, 5 Jul 2016 15:03:27 +0200, fw@strlen.de wrote: > >> (Or did I misunderstand this setup...?) > > > > tap0 bridged with vxlan0. > > route to vxlan0's remote peer is via eth0, configured with small mtu. > > Florian, any more comments? Sorry, I commented now. But I'd really like to hear what vxlan experts have to say about this, seems in RFC (7348) universe endpoint fragmention is not supposed to happen :-/