>>>>> "rm" == Roy Marples <roy%marples.name@localhost> writes: rm> http://mail-index.netbsd.org/regional-london/2006/09/14/0000.html oh you are fucking kidding me. well, the problem is still on your end, though. It's just in your modem instead of in your PF rules. Could you try to get a different modem? I have a BroadXTent modem that grabs its address over PPPoE, then hands the address it grabs to the connected host using DHCP with a short lease. If you had a modem like mine which used PPPoA instead, then in PPPoA mode you could get the full 1500 mtu, no? Some googling found this: http://www.wenks.ch/fabian/ADSL-PPPoA.html Another alternative is to use Cisco CPE like 1721+WIC-1ADSL or 857 and terminate the IPv6 on the Cisco. What's the point of this translation to PPPoE that Matthias says his modem is doing? It seems really odd. I'd think if the modem were speaking PPPoA it would certainly handle all the passwords and terminate the PPPoA on the modem, after which it would either act as a normal router doing its own NAT, or else at the weirdest pass to you its local PPPoA IP in that nonstandard proxyarp/fakeDHCP way of which my BroadXtent modem is capable. Is it for certain the modem is really converting PPPoA<->PPPoE like this, and not just that the DSLAM in the CO works in a variety of modes (oA, oE) among which you can choose, and the oE mode is broken for v6? I hope it's the modem that's broken not the DSLAM since you can swap the modem out, but I doubt the story because this is the first I've heard of a modem doing that. I suppose you'll ignore this and keep using the mss clamping. but FYI, it is really broken.
Description: PGP signature