Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 14 Jan 2015 15:12:56 -0600
From:      Mark Felder <feld@FreeBSD.org>
To:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: PMTU (must fragment) with ipsec [Was: Re: ipsec routing issue]
Message-ID:  <1421269976.1116901.213997149.582CB93B@webmail.messagingengine.com>
In-Reply-To: <54AA5613.4050303@omnilan.de>
References:  <54A17F33.2020708@ish.com.au> <AE3247B4-5692-4143-B8D4-3E5783C6F2CF@lists.zabbadoz.net> <54A1ED2F.2070305@heuristicsystems.com.au> <54AA5613.4050303@omnilan.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help


On Mon, Jan 5, 2015, at 03:14, Harry Schmalzbauer wrote:
>  Bez=FCglich Dewayne Geraghty's Nachricht vom 30.12.2014 01:09 (localtime=
):
> > Ari,
> >
> > Bjoern offers good advise (as usual).  This practical example might
>=20
> Hello,
>=20
> I'm quiet familar with ipsec(4), enc(1) and companions, but I haven't
> found a way to make routers return ICMP "must fragment" with gif-less
> tunnels.
> My last attempt was adding disc(4), assign it a MTU of 1420 and add a
> static route which points to disc.
> That works for 'route get remotelan' on the router itself, it's
> reporting correctly the mtu of 1420, but nevertheless, the router never
> returns "must fragment" (which I'd need because FreeBSD has PMTU on and
> we use jumbo frames).
> Apperently fragementation is handled before packets arrive at the
> outgoing interface. Of course, kernel policy "steals" the packet before
> ot reaches "outgoing" state.
> Do I miss any trick?
>

You can apply an MTU to a route instead of an interface, so perhaps that
would work better? Just add -mtu 1420 at the end of your route statement
and it will work its magic. :-)



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1421269976.1116901.213997149.582CB93B>