Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+2\/2\]\s+ipvs\:\s+Extend\s+MTU\s+check\s+to\s+account\s+for\s+IPv6\s+NAT\s+defrag\s+changes\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+2\/2\]\s+ipvs\:\s+Extend\s+MTU\s+check\s+to\s+account\s+for\s+IPv6\s+NAT\s+defrag\s+changes\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: Extend MTU check to account for IPv6 NAT defrag changes (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 12:47:40 +0300 (EEST); Hello, I think so. You can think of this in different way: all transmitters are called from same place, there is no difference in the packets we see. When we can use __mtu_check_toobig_v6 for other m; /html/lvs-devel/2012-08/msg00043.html (12,431 bytes)
2. Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: Extend MTU check to account for IPv6 NAT defrag changes (score: 1): Author: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 11:03:27 +0200; I guess: ntohs(old_iph->payload_len) + sizeof(struct ipv6hdr) Is the same as: skb->len To Julian, is the extra sizeof(struct ipv6hdr) addition to frag_max_size, wrong? (as the mtu is already reduced); /html/lvs-devel/2012-08/msg00042.html (12,813 bytes)
3. Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: Extend MTU check to account for IPv6 NAT defrag changes (score: 1): Author: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:28:54 +0900; I'm fine with these changes going through your tree (rather than my IPVS tree) once they are ready. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to; /html/lvs-devel/2012-08/msg00041.html (12,515 bytes)
4. Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: Extend MTU check to account for IPv6 NAT defrag changes (score: 1): Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:22:05 +0200 (MEST); Hello, This patch is necessary, to make IPVS work, after Patrick McHardys IPv6 NAT defragmentation changes. Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx> -- I would appriciate, if someon; /html/lvs-devel/2012-08/msg00040.html (12,680 bytes)
5. Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: Extend MTU check to account for IPv6 NAT defrag changes (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 18:20:32 +0300 (EEST); Hello, Sure mtu is already reduced with the new outer header size, may be we can just call __mtu_check_toobig_v6 with mtu? All other changes in patch 1 and 2 look ok and I'll ack them next time. Rega; /html/lvs-devel/2012-08/msg00033.html (11,406 bytes)
6. [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: Extend MTU check to account for IPv6 NAT defrag changes (score: 1): Author: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:42:27 +0200; This patch is necessary, to make IPVS work, after Patrick McHardys IPv6 NAT defragmentation changes. Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@xxxxxxxxxx> -- I would appriciate, if someone (e.g.; /html/lvs-devel/2012-08/msg00031.html (11,354 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]