On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 21:15:26 +0100
Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
[ mostrows removed from CC:, he bounces and this is no longer a pppoe discussion
anymore :) ]
> On Mon, 23 Feb 2004 10:26:13 -0800
> "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > 1) IPV4 icmp sents sk_sndbuf of it's sockets to "2 * SK_WMEM_MAX", that's
> > not
> > what it really wants. What it really wants is enough space to hold
> > ~2 full sized IPV4 packets, roughly 2 * 64K + struct sk_buff overhead
> > and thus that is what it should be using there.
>
> Just sk_buff overhead for what MTU? 576? (would be a bit extreme)
> And in theory it could be one byte packets too.
Two full sized ICMP echo responses (64K) of data plus 2 struct sk_buff, for
example.
> > 2) IPV6 icmp does the same as ipv4, except this value is even more wrong
> > there
> > especially considering jumbograms. With current code, sending a
> > jumbogram
> > ipv6 icmp packet would simply fail, and I wonder if anyone has even tried
> > this.
>
> Isn't even ICMPv6 limited to the minimum guaranteed MTU (1000 something) like
> ICMPv4 is to
> 576 bytes?
What about ECHO? I can't send an ICMPv6 jumbo sized ECHO and expect a fully
quoted response
back?
|