Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2022 17:07:58 -0500 From: Dustin Marquess <dmarquess@gmail.com> To: freebsd-net@brettglass.com Cc: "Patrick M. Hausen" <hausen@punkt.de>, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Wireguard, MTUs, and jumbo packets Message-ID: <CAJpsHY7z7VAaouafs8UbRTi=6JLqw4_4y5ymffv9BKK1wd5koA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <202204051443.IAA22257@mail.lariat.net> References: <202204051443.IAA22257@mail.lariat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Apr 5, 2022 at 9:46 AM <freebsd-net@brettglass.com> wrote: > > Interesting. That 60 byte overhead (which I understand is intended > to make the protocol connectionless) is concerning, because to send > a 1500 byte packet one needs to have enabled jumbo packets along > the entire path. Otherwise, there will be a lot of fragmentation... > which in turn will create yet more overhead. Strangely, I'm seeing a 96-byte overhead over IPv4, maybe because I'm using a PSK also? I'm seeing a 90-byte overhead with IKEv2, though, so an extra 6 bytes isn't a huge deal to me. -Dustin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJpsHY7z7VAaouafs8UbRTi=6JLqw4_4y5ymffv9BKK1wd5koA>