North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next |
Date Index |
Thread Index |
Author Index |
Historical
Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec
- From: Joe Maimon
- Date: Mon May 07 14:10:26 2007
Jo Rhett wrote:
On May 6, 2007, at 6:07 PM, Joe Maimon wrote:
Of course, and thats why I have cut down ip mtu and tcp adjust mss
and all the rest.
Not making much of a difference.
Um.. sorry if you mean more than you said, but where did you cut down
the TCP MTU? If you did it on your routers, then you are creating or
at least complementing the problem.
On the CPE dialer interface.
On the ezvpn dvti virtual-template
The only way to make smaller MTUs work is to alter the MTU on both the
origin and destination systems. Altering the MTU anywhere along the
path only breaks things.
Lower than 1500 mtu always requires some kind of hack in real life.
That would be the adjust-mss which is the hack-of-choice
- References:
- barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec Joe Maimon
- RE: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec Lincoln Dale
- Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec Joe Maimon
- Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec Steven M. Bellovin
- Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec Joe Maimon
- Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec Jo Rhett
|