Date: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 08:58:36 +0000 From: Brian Somers <brian@Awfulhak.org> To: schmitt@penta.ufrgs.br Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SKIP and NAT, I got it. Message-ID: <199903180858.IAA09478@keep.lan.Awfulhak.org> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 17 Mar 1999 17:13:07 -0300." <36F00CD3.163F743E@penta.ufrgs.br>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
> I had never send a mail to the list, but as I realized that some guys
> had problems putting NAT and SKIP in the same interface, I would like to
>
> contribute with my solution. I didnīt put them in paralel. The situation
[.....]
> when the packet is destined to the tunnel. So I had to alter MTU in
> every workstation of my network. Thatīs very bad.
>
> What I would like to know is why the packet is first encapsulated by
>
> skip and only after that the system finds out that it canīt be
> transmitted because of MTU.
Strange... the kernel will pay attention to the interface MTU.
I've never used skip, but I would imagine that it should reduce the
interface mtu by ~128 bytes so that it has room to encapsulate the
data (does skip encrypt too ? If so, it'll probably need a few
bytes more than 128).
Is this happening ?
> Marcelo Augusto Rauh Schmitt
> COPS Informatica -
> Porto Alegre - RS
> Brazil
--
Brian <brian@Awfulhak.org> <brian@FreeBSD.org> <brian@OpenBSD.org>
<http://www.Awfulhak.org>;
Don't _EVER_ lose your sense of humour !
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199903180858.IAA09478>