[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4684F5D3.8020506@domdv.de>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:06:43 +0200
From: Andreas Steinmetz <ast@...dv.de>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
CC: Linux Kernel Mailinglist <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netfilter-devel@...ts.netfilter.org
Subject: Re: mss to pmtu clamping partially broken?
Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
>> Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>
>>> Andreas Steinmetz wrote:
>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>> The tcpdump on the client shows that the mss of the incoming syn reply
>>>> packet is *NOT* clamped to the ppp interface mtu.
>>>
>>> You forgot to mention *how* you're clamping the MSS. Using
>>> TCPMSS? Do you have a rule for incoming packets?
>>>
>>
>> The relevant iptables commands I do use for masquerading and clamping are:
>>
>> iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o ppp0 -j MASQUERADE
>> iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS \
>> --clamp-mss-to-pmtu
>
>
> Two things here:
>
> - tcpdumps on ppp0 will show unclamped packets since they haven't
> been forwarded yet
>
That is true, I know this.
> - assuming you have ethernet internally, the PMTU from your router
> to the internal hosts is 1500, so it won't do any clamping.
>
Yep, internal PMTU is 1500, still the incoming packets are clamped to
1452 on the one line and not clamped on the other.
> Does that explain it?
>
> A useful thing for TCPMSS for routers would be to clamp to the
> minimum of the PMTU of both directions. But thats not supported
> so far.
>
I wonder, as somteimes it gets clamped. If it would never have been
clamped I wouldn't have asked.
--
Andreas Steinmetz SPAMmers use robotrap@...dv.de
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists