In my case all my NIC cards can support jumbo frames. So i can really send a 1600 byte packet. However, i am being restricted by the OVS's internal port's MTU which is fixed to 1500. As a result i am unable to send out larger packets (because of the VXLAN header addition). Can somebody please help me here?
Dave On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:39 PM, Dave Waters <[email protected]> wrote: > That wouldnt work since anybody connected to portA and sending a 1500 byte > packet, would be unable to do so. > > Is there a known limitation wherein i can increase the MTU of an internal > bridge port? > > Dave > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Joe Stringer <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Have you tried decreasing the MTU of portA such that packets are >> encapsulated they're <=1500B? >> >> On 23 July 2015 at 08:19, Dave Waters <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Its not. But how do i ensure that my packet does not get dropped >> somewhere >> > downstream, since i have now increased it beyond the original value? >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 7:49 PM, gowrishankar >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Thursday 23 July 2015 04:16 AM, Dave Waters wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi, >> >>> >> >>> I have two ports in my OVS bridge. I receive packets from one port >> >>> (portA) and i send them out of the other (portB). When i send out the >> >>> packets, they are VXLAN tunneled to the other end. >> >>> >> >>> Now, the default MTU of all ports (including the bridge port) is 1500 >> in >> >>> my setup. >> >>> >> >>> The issue is that when i get a 1500 byte packet on portA, i try to >> push >> >>> it out on portB after slapping on the VXLAN headers. This results in a >> >>> packet size thats greater than what portB can handle, and hence the >> packets >> >>> are dropped. >> >>> >> >> >> >> Is increasing MTU of portB to 1550 (to accommodate additional 50 bytes >> >> when no vlan taged) a constraint in your setup ? >> >> >> >> >> >>> I know that OVS does not handle IP fragmentation/reassembly, so how >> do we >> >>> deal with this situation? I dont think we can rely on path MTU >> discovery >> >>> since not all applications do PMTU before spewing out packets. Any >> ideas, >> >>> anybody? >> >>> >> >>> Warm regards, >> >>> Dave >> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Regards, >> >> Gowrishankar M >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > discuss mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss >> > >> > >
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
