On 10 May 2013 16:43, Chris Cappuccio <[email protected]> wrote: > Stuart Henderson [[email protected]] wrote: >> On 2013/02/22 12:30, Stuart Henderson wrote: >> > I thought we already had something for this after the misc@ thread >> > a few months ago, but clearly not. >> > >> > Adapted from FreeBSD if_lagg.c r171661 (which includes capability >> > setting which we already do). >> > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/sys/net/if_lagg.c?r1=171603&r2=171661 >> >> JJ tested this diff but I didn't hear much else. Any comments? > > if (tr->tr_ac.ac_if.if_mtu != ifp->if_mtu) seems wrong. what about people > who want to use trunk between two totally different interfaces for failover? > > i think the trunk mtu should simply be the lowest common of the group. >
i agree with chris. doesn't mtu get propogated into the routing table? what if you failover and your other trunk port can't handle packets that big but ip_output thinks it should be fine?
