From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751353AbWIYMfb (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:35:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751349AbWIYMfb (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:35:31 -0400 Received: from ironport-c10.fh-zwickau.de ([141.32.72.200]:21800 "EHLO ironport-c10.fh-zwickau.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751299AbWIYMfa (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Sep 2006 08:35:30 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AQAAAGpoF0WLcgEBDQ X-IronPort-AV: i="4.09,213,1157320800"; d="scan'208"; a="3471405:sNHT37326836" Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:35:25 +0200 From: Joerg Roedel To: Andi Kleen Cc: David Miller , jbglaw@lug-owl.de, kaber@trash.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/03][RESUBMIT] net: EtherIP tunnel driver Message-ID: <20060925123525.GE23028@zlug.org> References: <20060923120704.GA32284@zlug.org> <20060925115744.GD23028@zlug.org> <200609251416.15738.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200609251416.15738.ak@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 02:16:15PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Monday 25 September 2006 13:57, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 25, 2006 at 12:22:41PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > How would you convince those old LAN games to use a MTU < 1500 which > > > is needed for the tunnel? I bet they have the size hardcoded. > > > > The tunnel provides an MTU of 1500. To guarantee this, it never sets the > > DF flag in outgoing packets. > > This means it will multiply all full sized packets. That sounds horrible. Yes, all full sized packets gets fragmented at the IP layer according to the MTU of the physical device. As I know, this is the only way to guarantee the full Ethernet MTU on the tunnel device. This guarantee is required for layer 3 protocols that does not know the concept of a path MTU (as used by some old LAN based games ;-) And for some cases this procedure is also defined in RFC 2473, section 7. for "Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6". Joerg