[c-nsp] ip tcp adjust-mss <value> - Alternative?

[chris at akko.id.au]

Thanks Arie,
That is something we've also looked at but it's not the silver bullet
that we are after for use with the 10K unfortunately.

The reason "ip tcp adjust-mss" has worked so well for us in the past
on our other smaller capacity boxes (7200/7301s acting as LNS') is
because it would cure the MTU issues for client machines (e.g. a LAN
of multiple workstation PCs) behinde older CPE/Gateway type devices
that don't handle fragmentation very well or at all, without the need
for manual adjustment of end-user MTU settings. 

Regards,
Chris

>
>---- Original Message ----
>From: arievayner at gmail.com
>To: ranmails at gmail.com
>Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ip tcp adjust-mss <value> - Alternative?
>Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 22:56:08 +0400
>
>>Another thing to look at (it's not perfect, but it's something) is
>>"Automatically Adjusting the IP MTU".
>>Look at this document on CCO:
>>
>>http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/tech/tk801/tk703/technologies_tec
>h_note09186a0080094c4f.shtml
>>
>>Arie
>>CCIE #12198
>>
>>On 7/1/05, Ran Liebermann <ranmails at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Chris,
>>> 
>>> I agree.
>>> Indeed this is a method I like the least (unsetting the DF bit),
>but
>>> some vendors, at least in the BRAS solutions, used to provide just
>>> this option.
>>> 
>>> In our network we make sure that all paths that a tunnel can go
>>> through will support MTU larger than 1500 bytes plus the tunnel
>header
>>> overhead.
>>> 
>>> (I just noticed that we replied eachother off-list, so I put it
>back
>>> on the list).
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Ran.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 29/06/05, [A] <chris at akko.id.au> wrote:
>>> > Hi Ran,
>>> > Thanks for your response. Apart from effectively disabling PMTUD
>itself,
>>> > what else if anything will clearing the df bit for only TCP
>packets break in
>>> > your experience?
>>> >
>>> > Obviously what we don't want is to cause more (or bigger)
>problems than we
>>> > actually fix by implementing something like this...
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Chris
>>> >
>>> > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "Ran Liebermann" <ranmails at gmail.com>
>>> > To: <chris at akko.id.au>
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 2:26 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: [c-nsp] ip tcp adjust-mss <value> - Alternative?
>>> >
>>> > Either trying harder to increase the MTU throughout the tunnel's
>path,
>>> > or using a route-map to unset the DF bit in packets that have it
>set
>>> > to 1.
>>> >
>>> > Regards,
>>> > --
>>> > Ran.
>>> >
>>> > On 28/06/05, chris at akko.id.au <chris at akko.id.au> wrote:
>>> > > Hi list,
>>> > > Just wondering what other SP's use as an alternative to the
>"ip tcp
>>> > > adjust-mss" command on platforms that don't support it (e.g.
>the
>>> > > 10008ESR
>>> > > PRE2) for working around MTU & fragmentation issues in an
>L2TP/PPPoE
>>> > > LNS
>>> > > environment.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thanks in advance.
>>> > >
>>> > > Regards,
>>> > > Chris
>>> > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>>> > > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
>>> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>>>
>>