Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 18:24:18 -0500 From: Barney Wolff <barney@databus.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: jumbograms (& em) & nfs a no go Message-ID: <20031101232418.GA97622@pit.databus.com> In-Reply-To: <3FA420F3.35045EF6@mindspring.com> References: <20031029183808.M99053@prg.traveller.cz> <3FA223AB.797B2528@mindspring.com> <20031031175030.GB78910@pit.databus.com> <3FA420F3.35045EF6@mindspring.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 01:09:07PM -0800, Terry Lambert wrote: > Barney Wolff wrote: > > > Implies the sending host is not honoring the MTU restriction when > > > deciding whether or not to frag packets. > > > > 67582 looks awfully bogus even as a pre-frag length. How could that come > > over the wire? > > The sending host is not honoring the MTU restriction? > > 8-) 8-). > > Most likely, a direct call to ether_output, or a code path that > results in fragmentation not being implemented; see my other post: > it could be that he's using NFS over UDP, and that's doing it. Er, how is it possible to send a UDP packet > 65535? Last time I looked it was a 16-bit field. -- Barney Wolff http://www.databus.com/bwresume.pdf I'm available by contract or FT, in the NYC metro area or via the 'Net.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031101232418.GA97622>