--JwB53PgKC5A7+0Ej
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Martin Husemann wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 29, 2004 at 04:07:37PM +0100, Christian Biere wrote:
> There is no real consensus what "good" values for mssclamp are. It seems
> to highly depend on your ISPs network connection and the DSL access
> hardware and it's configuration they are using.

Hmm, ipnat.conf(5) claims 1452 *is* the correct value for ADSL. According
to my provider's information I could even use a MTU of 1456. However, I've
read somewhere that this depends on your luck which DSLAM, router or whatev=
er
you get when you create a new session. So I sticked to 1452.
=20
> > Anyway, I don't see what's so special about netbsd.org.
=20
> Nothing. It's just bad luck. You have ~0 chance to find the badly configu=
red

Signed or unsigned? ;-)

> router in your ISPs network, and even less to get it fixed.

Hmmm, I was pretty sure it was either a problem on my hosts or
www.netbsd.org.
=20
> Just use the working clamping size and be happy.

Ooops, I must have been confused. I think I confused the TCP MTU with
the PPPoE interface MTU. The latter was set to 1452. I've increased it
to 1492 which should be the correct value (8 bytes for the PPPoE header).
The mssclamp value of 1440 which is the maximum I can use with
www.netbsd.org looks somewhat arbitrary to me but now *everything*
runs like a breeze.

Thanks,
--=20
Christian
=20
As you can see, this a signature. It's not related to the contents of the
mail in any way. But you probably won't listen to me anyway, will you?

--JwB53PgKC5A7+0Ej
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFAQhP+0KQix3oyIMcRAhR9AJ9WXXwHyMn69KDIyrl2TFEYvoFPagCfW/Pl
MUMdHjeW0uZvkb/x+YwBwmY=
=an1t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--JwB53PgKC5A7+0Ej--