Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion
joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com> Fri, 05 September 2014 00:52 UTC
Return-Path: <joelja@bogus.com>
X-Original-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05C4A1A02E0 for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 17:52:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.568
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.568 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id shpQqGTF384V for <v6ops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 17:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nagasaki.bogus.com (nagasaki.bogus.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 597E61A02F0 for <v6ops@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Sep 2014 17:52:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mb-aye.local (c-67-188-0-113.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.188.0.113]) (authenticated bits=0) by nagasaki.bogus.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id s850qeof040721 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Fri, 5 Sep 2014 00:52:40 GMT (envelope-from joelja@bogus.com)
Message-ID: <54090953.7010709@bogus.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2014 17:52:35 -0700
From: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:32.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/32.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <0D370E74-688B-4EB3-A691-309A03AF20BA@cisco.com> <53FBA174.2040302@isi.edu> <53FBA6E1.90905@bogus.com> <CAPi140PMeM9omtm11+NHa2ywUfof_tE7HknKExtoEb32mm7L_w@mail.gmail.com> <71D0D5E8-80E9-430B-8ED4-16C1F99082CC@cisco.com> <54020ECC.4000000@globis.net> <CAEmG1=redpYUnv9R-uf+cJ4e+iPCf6zMHzVxeKNMGjcC=BjR+Q@mail.gmail.com> <5402C26A.8060304@globis.net> <540626F6.1020103@scea.com> <28F170C9-1E44-42CB-B11A-4A7173511D22@puck.nether.net> <5408F5DB.6000906@bogus.com> <5408FD25.4000505@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5408FD25.4000505@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vw6dOCg1F2SHDu7PPDbbiA9he8TjChJCt"
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (nagasaki.bogus.com [147.28.0.81]); Fri, 05 Sep 2014 00:52:40 +0000 (UTC)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/v6ops/iXrrSgFSYieIWoDUHVWa4dgOYAU
Cc: v6ops@ietf.org, Tom Perrine <tperrine@scea.com>
Subject: Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion
X-BeenThere: v6ops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6ops discussion list <v6ops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/v6ops/>
List-Post: <mailto:v6ops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops>, <mailto:v6ops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 00:52:45 -0000
On 9/4/14 5:00 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > On 05/09/2014 11:29, joel jaeggli wrote: >> On 9/4/14 3:09 PM, Jared Mauch wrote: >>> We configure customer links at 1500 (default), 4470 and 9000. >> >> in the cases that I experienced I have my mss set to 1440. So clients >> with a higher MTU than 1500 are no so much of an issue. almost all of >> the cases that I have have examined were due to encapsulation. > > Yes, and MSS negotiation down to 1220 doesn't always work, so > with 1280 tunnels still around, even 1440 can cause failures. sure that's kinda I find it necessary make sure the packet makes it when i get one. I suspect even 1220 can hose you in some corner case... I'd rather have my extra 220 bytes of pdu in any event. > Brian > >> >>> - Jared >>> >>>> On Sep 2, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Tom Perrine <tperrine@scea.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> What MTUs are actually (commonly) seen in the wild? >>>> >>>> I can only think of less than a dozen that I would expect to see, assuming that the actual MTU is based solely on the underlying network technology. >>>> >>>> Is planning and assuming that we'll see each and every possible MTU actually necessary? >>>> >>>> I agree that we wouldn't want to artificially limit MTUs to only a few common ones, I mean look how /64s became embedded in silicon... >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> v6ops mailing list >>>> v6ops@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >>> _______________________________________________ >>> v6ops mailing list >>> v6ops@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >>> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> v6ops mailing list >> v6ops@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6ops >
- [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Joe Touch
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion joel jaeggli
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Andrew 👽 Yourtchenko
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Ray Hunter
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Matthew Petach
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Ray Hunter
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion joel jaeggli
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion joel jaeggli
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Tom Perrine
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Tom Perrine
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Joe Touch
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Jared Mauch
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion joel jaeggli
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Jared Mauch
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion joel jaeggli
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Fernando Gont
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Ray Hunter
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Joe Touch
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Joe Touch
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Owen DeLong
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Mikael Abrahamsson
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Mark Andrews
- Re: [v6ops] PMTUD issue discussion Templin, Fred L