I must admit - I didn't know such an option existed... and that's great to know...
On a related note to the PS below... we have tested lt2tpv3 on a few different boxes running various IOS images and on each of the devices we did test we seen the same behavior. This means something is either broke in the code in my opinion or that we are doing something wrong. Typically that means the second option in our case (lol) but I did get a fair amount of feedback offline from folks with similar problems....;) Paul -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Yourtchenko [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: June 18, 2009 10:32 PM To: Ge Moua Cc: Paul Stewart; [email protected] Subject: Re: [c-nsp] L2TPv3 and VLANs Hi Ge, On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Ge Moua wrote: [snip] > I haven't done this yet but one can adjust max segment size on end-station > hosts to something like 1300 (which of course would affect all protocol > types); there are open source tools to do this, but downside is that all the > end-station hosts need to touched for consistency; i suppose I'm too lazy : - ( Would not the clients honour the DHCP option 26 ? cheers, andrew p.s. of course, if the fragmenting does not take place of the pass-through packets with no DF, that deserves a closer look. Fragmentation considered harmful and all, still it should work. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
