From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv4: Namespecify TCP PMTU mechanism Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 14:09:11 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <20150209.140911.1096080668059319311.davem@redhat.com> References: <1423471498-22442-1-git-send-email-fan.du@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jheffner@psc.edu, netdev@vger.kernel.org, fengyuleidian0615@gmail.com To: fan.du@intel.com Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47892 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756140AbbBIWJX (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Feb 2015 17:09:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1423471498-22442-1-git-send-email-fan.du@intel.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Fan Du Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 16:44:58 +0800 > Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery works separately beside > Path MTU Discovery at IP level, different net namespace has > various requirements on which one to chose, e.g., a virutalized > container instance would require TCP PMTU to probe an usable > effective mtu for underlying tunnel, while the host would > employ classical ICMP based pmtu to function. > > Hence making TCP PMTU mechanism per net namespace to decouple > two functionality. Furthermore the probe base MSS should also > be configured separately for each namespace. > > Signed-off-by: Fan Du This does not apply cleanly to net-next, please respin.