similar to: [jik@kamens.brookline.ma.us: MSS clamping doesn''t work with masquerading through VPN?]

Hello, I have an interesting question. I can''t find a solution anywhere to this problem. I have an adsl connection which is able to send a full data packet in about 150ms. I want to cut this time down to decrease latency while serving files, so I thought I''d try and reduce the packet size for the offending upload streams (my webserver). The trick is that I also want all other

https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7889 Summary: Add "--backup-deleted" Product: rsync Version: 3.0.7 Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P3 Component: core AssignedTo: wayned at samba.org ReportedBy: jik at kamens.brookline.ma.us

Hey, My internet is provided via ADSL using PPPoE. When I take a look at ifconfig''s output, I see that eth0 has an MTU of 1500, and ppp0 has an MTU of 1492. I don''t _think_ that rp-pppoe (my pppoe util) is clamping the MSS. I am noticing some latency when there''s a lot of bandwidth in use (but not >90%). What should I clamp, eth0/ppp0? How much? And what with,

Greetings, I submitted a patch for a new feature for rsync through bugzilla last December. Wayne said he was leaning toward including the new feature I proposed in rsync 3.1. Nearly ten months later, there is still no rsync 3.1. :-) Is there any information available about the timeline of upcoming releases? Thanks, Jonathan Kamens -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment

Hi I have a (bizarre) problem with ssh, which someone has suggested may be down to the MSS value being too high. I know that within Shorewall I can clamp the MSS value to the MTU-40 value, but is there a way I can set MSS to a discreet value? I just want to (dis)prove the MSS theory at the moment (I know it isn''t a real fix). Thanks, Keith

Hi, I am using tinc 1.0.23 in router mode and am having trouble with intermittent TCP connect timeouts that do not occur when routing the TCP over the internet directly. I am using a pure IPv6 setup (i.e direct IPv6 connections, and tunneled IPv6 subnets). My configs are as follows: Site 1: ----------------------- tinc.conf: Name = rsukmhb AddressFamily = ipv6 BindToAddress =

Hello all, This is a problem and patch reported to Red Hat Bugzilla by Jonathan Kamens <jik at kamens.brookline.ma.us>. I'm just acting as a relay :-) jik has experienced some weird crashes relating to window size changes or some similar activity. These are rather hard to trace. Problem was fixed by patching clientloop, where fd_set structures appear to be improperly zeroed (bytes vs

current content below is annotated by some suggestions of things to add along with questions for those who know more than I do [in brackets] ================ # iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS --clamp-mss-to-pmtu This calculates the proper MSS for your link. [If I understand the code correctly ... - expert intervention invited] More precisely, this sets the

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=662 Phil Oester <netfilter at linuxace.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED CC| |netfilter at linuxace.com Resolution|

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1165 Bug ID: 1165 Summary: Feature Request - Clamp MTU to MSS Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: x86_64 OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: nft Assignee: pablo at netfilter.org

https://bugzilla.netfilter.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1058 Bug ID: 1058 Summary: Add clamp MSS to MTU Product: nftables Version: unspecified Hardware: All OS: All Status: NEW Severity: enhancement Priority: P5 Component: nft Assignee: pablo at netfilter.org Reporter:

Hello every one, first time poster, four month shorewaller ;) As the subject states, I''ve been experienced the infamous trouble described in the next excerpt from shorewall.conf # MSS CLAMPING # # Set this variable to "Yes" or "yes" if you want the TCP "Clamp MSS to PMTU" # option. This option is most commonly required when your internet # interface is some

Hi, tinc experts abc to def at x.x.x.x port 655 options d weight 540 How’s the 540 weight been calculated? What does it mean? How can I leverage this weight? The d of after options mean direct?

Hello, I am in the process of troubleshooting another problem and noticed a rather strange behavior with the openssh client. A client (OpenSSH 5.3) and a server (6.7p1) do the TCP handshake, the client announces a MSS of 1460 (its MTU is 1500), while the server announces a MSS of 1260 (its MTU is set to 1300). What troubles me is, that the client is sending the server a frame of 2034 bytes

https://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1430 Summary: Restore support for "none" cipher, i.e., unencrypted connections Classification: Unclassified Product: Portable OpenSSH Version: 4.7p1 Platform: Other OS/Version: Other Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2

I have a user with with W7/TBird/IMAP to my dovecot 2.1.17 server, the user complains whilst he is composing lengthy emails (with multiple fowrds/replies quoted in the message) he gets 'hour glass' over compose windows with some message about not being able to save drafts, he then powers off ADSL modem, which enables him to continue composing email, powers on ADSL, and sends email what

With pleasure we announce the release of tinc version 1.1pre16. Here is a summary of the changes in tinc 1.1pre16: * Fixed building with support for UML sockets. * Documentation updates and spelling fixes. * Support for MSS clamping of IP-in-IP packets. * Fixed parsing of the -b flag. * Added the ability to set a firemall mark on sockets on Linux. * Minor improvements to the build system.

With pleasure we announce the release of tinc version 1.1pre16. Here is a summary of the changes in tinc 1.1pre16: * Fixed building with support for UML sockets. * Documentation updates and spelling fixes. * Support for MSS clamping of IP-in-IP packets. * Fixed parsing of the -b flag. * Added the ability to set a firemall mark on sockets on Linux. * Minor improvements to the build system.

Am 23.06.2020 08:43, schrieb Luca Bertoncello: And another thing, I discovered right now... > Could you suggest me something to restrict the problem? > Currently, I think the problem can be: > > 1) on Asterisk > 2) on my Gateway/Firewall A couple of years ago I added this entry in my firewall: /sbin/iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS

I don?t want to do this for all users?.but? I have a few users who insist that they use their mailboxes regularly and don?t want it cancelled. Fine. But they won?t clean them out either. What steps would you all recommend for setting quotas on some users but not others? Specifically starting out with identifying WHICH accounts have excessive amounts of crap in them, by age, then sending them