* YASUOKA Masahiko [2012-01-12 01:55:44]:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:31:49 -0500
> Matt Dainty wrote:
> > @@ -911,7 +933,7 @@
> > return (ENXIO);
> > }
> >
> > - if (sc->sc_sppp.pp_if.if_mtu >
> > + if
Hello,
On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 18:31:49 -0500
Matt Dainty wrote:
> @@ -911,7 +933,7 @@
> return (ENXIO);
> }
>
> - if (sc->sc_sppp.pp_if.if_mtu >
> + if (sc->sc_sppp.pp_if.if_mtu !=
>
* Matt Dainty [2012-01-09 20:21:54]:
> * Matt Dainty [2012-01-02 16:30:55]:
> > * Stuart Henderson [2011-12-31 10:12:41]:
> > >
> > > If the remote side doesn't echo our tag back, we should restrict ourselves
> > > to PPPOE_MAXMTU.
> > >
> > > Certainly until we are checking this I think we sh
* Matt Dainty [2012-01-02 16:30:55]:
> * Stuart Henderson [2011-12-31 10:12:41]:
> >
> > If the remote side doesn't echo our tag back, we should restrict ourselves
> > to PPPOE_MAXMTU.
> >
> > Certainly until we are checking this I think we should avoid automatically
> > raising pppoe(4)'s MTU
* Stuart Henderson [2011-12-31 10:12:41]:
> On 2011/12/27 21:12, Matt Dainty wrote:
> > Attached are three patches for RFC 4638 PPPoE support. The first two are
> > for pppoe(4) based on similar changes made to NetBSD. The third patch is
> > to tcpdump(8) so it recognises the additional tag type.
On 2011/12/27 21:12, Matt Dainty wrote:
> Attached are three patches for RFC 4638 PPPoE support. The first two are
> for pppoe(4) based on similar changes made to NetBSD. The third patch is
> to tcpdump(8) so it recognises the additional tag type.
..
> I'm aware the patch as it currently stands ass
Attached are three patches for RFC 4638 PPPoE support. The first two are
for pppoe(4) based on similar changes made to NetBSD. The third patch is
to tcpdump(8) so it recognises the additional tag type.
I've been running this on my Soekris net6501 with one of the the built
in em(4) chips hooked up
