From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pascal Hambourg Subject: Re: Ugly problem with ebtables Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:40:38 +0200 Message-ID: <49F6CF16.2060508@plouf.fr.eu.org> References: <49F5B376.2090101@plouf.fr.eu.org> <07d1b2f79cd9ef9765046bb4503bc658.squirrel@limbo.ari.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <07d1b2f79cd9ef9765046bb4503bc658.squirrel@limbo.ari.es> Sender: netfilter-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed" To: netfilter List Juan Antonio a =E9crit : >=20 >> Couldn't it be an MTU problem in the tunnel ? AFAIK, when TCP transm= its >> a message which must be segmented, it sends maximum-size segments >> without the PUSH flag and a last smaller segment with the PUSH flag = set >> containing the remaining data. >=20 > I know that, really this is the problem. The first segments without t= he > PUSH flag dissapear completely in spite of these go out for the tunne= l . > The MTU is the first thing that I verified and this is 1500 in both s= ides. Did you check that the tunnel can actually handle packets of that size,= =20 for example by sending pings of various sizes up to 1500 through it ? Tunnel encapsulation adds overhead, which might create fragmentation or= =20 other issues.