Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 31 Mar 2017 01:10:38 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 173444] [socket] [patch] IPV6_USE_MIN_MTU and TCP is broken
Message-ID:  <bug-173444-2472-7ELXhbpgnv@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-173444-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-173444-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D173444

--- Comment #12 from Andrey V. Elsukov <ae@FreeBSD.org> ---
(In reply to marka from comment #10)
> (In reply to Andrey V. Elsukov from comment #8)
> So what!  Most DNS/TCP response is a few of packets.  What does it
> matter if it is the 3 or 4 packets.

Zone transfers need a lot of such few packets.

> What matters is avoiding PMTUD as it is NOT reliable.  Setting the
> IPv6 packet size to 1280 avoids triggering PMTUD issues.  Limiting
> the packet size avoids timeout and retransmissions due to PTB not
> been generated due to rate limiting or being lost due to stupid
> load balancers and firewalls that drop ICMP.
>=20
> Go put your validating resolvers behind a IPv6 in IPv4 link then
> come back and say this is not needed.

When I build the network in the DC, I know better what MTU can be used in my
network. And forcing 1280 bytes size for the network, where 9k is the defau=
lt
MTU is at least strange in the 2017.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-173444-2472-7ELXhbpgnv>