But anyway, if you read my post you will see that I am going to use MSS as the main mean.
#Tcp mss fortigate windows
So I then configure my mss adjust to 1300 for good measure - everything works fine, includes ADSL WAN as well.ġ300 is my golden does not work, windows systems do not react or change the MTU of an interface when a router send an icmp "fragementation needed" Total 146 Bytes - round it up 150 bytes of overhead BEFORE you think about the data! Leaves you with 1350 bytes for the data IF the packets has the DF bit set. Personally when using GRE & Encryption I do the following, work out my overhead then configure MSS Adjust:. If you are unlucky and the application you are using sends ALL packets with the DF bit set, you have an issue. Sadly they will send this with the DF set. Default MTU is 1500 - so the sender will send his MSS as 1460, the remote end will do the same. What you need to remember is the process - TCP hasnshake, the sender looks at it's MTU and subtracts 20 bytes to IP header, and 20 bytes for the TCP header. PMTDU does not work, windows systems do not react or change the MTU of an interface when a router send an icmp "fragementation needed" Why I am thinking of PMTUD together with MSS adjustment? - Because MSS works for TCP traffic only. Please help me to clarify the question, because I can not handle the information I read, I am feeling giddy. do nothing (which means PMTUD is disabled, MSS and MTU by default) enable PMTUD and make sure "ip unreachables" option is activated (AFAIK, it is by default) on the offices Cisco routers: PMTUD is disabled by default, MTU on physical interfaces = 1500, on GRE tunnel = 1476, ip unreachables on WAN interfaces we are turning off (to provide invisibility). => All is ready for PMTUD (possibly except personal firewalls, which could block ICMP packets from a router and thus prevent PMTUD from functioning properly) in the offices we have Ethernet networks and Windows based PCs, which have PMTUD enabled, MTU = 1500, ICMP unreachables enabled.
#Tcp mss fortigate plus
(AFAIK, the latter means ACLs on our routers WAN interfaces for incoming traffic denying everything except traffic from our another respective router WAN interfaces plus "no ip unreachables". provide invisibility for my routers in public networks. to provide the best performance of the connections between hosts in the head office and each branch I have DM-VPN (as I understand it means GRE + IPSec in transport mode?) with my local regional branches. I know I can use "ping -f" but, AFAIK, GRE will encapsulate the original packet and coolly fragment it, so I will not see the real max MTU (according to my calcs it would be ~ 1438.) How to check the real max MTU between two Cisco routers connected via VPN (GRE + IPSec)? As I understand in case of GRE + IPSec (obviously transport mode) which works over ADSL line we have MSS = 1500 - 24 (GRE) - 38 (IPSec transport mode) - 20 (IP) - 20 (TCP) - 8 (for DSL) = 1390. If I have DMVPN (GRE + IPSec) tunnels with my branches and I also have ACL (for incoming traffic) on the head office router WAN interface, which permits isakmp, esp and icmp traffic from the branch router only, and I enable PMTUD together with ip unreachables on that interface, what should I add in the ACL for PMTUD function to work normally? I mean should I add a filter to permit ICMP packets from the next hop? Or should I permit ICMP from any hop?ģ. When using GRE+IPSec tunnels in what order are the following procedures done: fragmentation / encapsulation / encryption?Ģ.
#Tcp mss fortigate full
The idea is clear for me, the first source is a full ABC for the issue, but I still have some questions.ġ. Step-by-step instructions for tuning TCP under Windows XP.mht Resolve IP Fragmentation, MTU, MSS, PMTUD Issues with GRE and IPSEC.pdf (I read this one twice )Īdjusting IP MTU, TCP MSS, and PMTUD on Windows Systems.pdf I have some questions about the best strategy for MSS / MTU definition and PMTUD activation.
0 kommentar(er)
