>>>>> "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.
Attachment:
pgp5uGiXXhKZE.pgp
Description: PGP signature