netdev - Re: Question regarding protocol specific mtu for FCoE

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4A26BAF7.3070301@hp.com>
Date:	Wed, 03 Jun 2009 11:03:35 -0700
From:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To:	"Zou, Yi" <yi.zou@...el.com>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Leech, Christopher" <christopher.leech@...el.com>,
	"Dev, Vasu" <vasu.dev@...el.com>,
	"Love, Robert W" <robert.w.love@...el.com>,
	"Ma, Steve" <steve.ma@...el.com>,
	"Waskiewicz Jr, Peter P" <peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com>,
	"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Subject: Re: Question regarding protocol specific mtu for FCoE

Zou, Yi wrote:
> Hi,
> I am trying to figure out a way to support a different MTU for Fiber
> Channel over Ethernet (FCoE), where it is preferred to have a baby jumbo
> frame with MTU=2158 (14 bytes FCoE header + 24 bytes FC header + 2112
> bytes max FC payload + 4 bytes FC CRC + 4 bytes FCoE trailer).
> 
> Similar to nedev->mtu being used everywhere for LAN traffic, I wonder if
> it is desirable or feasible to add another protocol specific MTU (which
> is my case is FCoE) to netdev so any eth driver supporting converged
> traffic (e.g. LAN + FCoE) over netdev can make use of it.

Do FCoE upper layers have anything analagous to a TCP_MAXSEG option?  That allows 
an application using TCP to ask for a smaller MSS than TCP might have chosen 
otherwise.

Would a NIC over which FCoE was running be able to be of two minds of what the 
MTU happens to be?  I'd think that if one user of the NIC needed/wanted and MTU > 
foo one would just set the MTU large enough to include foo and be done with it?

In IP networking space at least, if there is a destination for which one does not 
want to use the default MTU, one can set-up a destination-specific (Path) MTU in 
the routing table that will (if smaller) override the link-local MTU for traffic 
going to/from that destination.

rick jones
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html