netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IP More Fragements bit problem.

To: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: IP More Fragements bit problem.
From: Vincent Roqueta <vincent.roqueta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:27:38 +0100
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <m1braruf85.fsf@muc.de>
Organization: BULL SA
References: <200502111708.16024.vincent.roqueta@ext.bull.net> <m1braruf85.fsf@muc.de>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.6.1
Le vendredi 11 Février 2005 19:24, vous avez écrit :
> Vincent Roqueta <vincent.roqueta@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > D + MF
> > *DELAY*
> > A + MF
> > B + MF
> > C + MF
> > D + MF
> > *DELAY*
> > ...
> >
> > After a while AIX destroy first fragments because of the IP fragements
> > life time. Trond Myklebust said me you can do anything for that?
>
> Are you sure? I tested 2.6.10rc3 and it works correctly for
> me with ping. The algorithm in ip_fragment() looks good too
> from visual inspection.
Yes, I am sure testing with NFSv3 over UDP.
I can send you traces seen by AIX.

> And ping uses the same code to fragment as NFS sunrpc
> over UDP.
Ok.
> 19:15:24.100934 averell > trent: (frag 64564:1480@1480+)
> 19:15:24.100938 averell > trent: (frag 64564:1480@2960+)
> 19:15:24.100943 averell > trent: (frag 64564:1480@4440+)
> 19:15:24.100947 averell > trent: (frag 64564:1480@5920+)
> 19:15:24.100951 averell > trent: (frag 64564:1480@7400+)
> 19:15:24.100957 averell > trent: (frag 64564:1128@8880)     <--- No MF.
I don't have that :(

> Also why are you testing NFSv4 over UDP anyways? I thought
> everybody was finally running it over TCP now.
I am not testing NFSv4 over UDP, I am doing NFSv3 tests over UDP to compare 
performances between NFSv4 and NFSv3, and some interoperablity testing on NFS 
(v3 and v4). That the last tests that does not work fine.

Vincent


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>