>> On Wed, 15 Jun 2016, Alan Davey wrote:
>>
>>> The only case that would break is that where an application relies on
>>> the existing (documented as a bug) feature of getting an EMSGSIZE
>>> return code in the case of an over-sized packet. A
From: David Miller [mailto:da...@davemloft.net]
Sent: 08 June 2016 18:26
>> - The current behaviour is counter-intuitive (fragmentation takes
>> - place in all other cases) and therefore different to what
>> - everyone expects.
>
> But it's what all existing applications must expect, and as
.
Regards
Alan
-Original Message-
From: David Miller [mailto:da...@davemloft.net]
Sent: 31 May 2016 19:39
To: Alan Davey
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; kuz...@ms2.inr.ac.ru; jmor...@namei.org;
yoshf...@linux-ipv6.org; ka...@trash.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Fragment large datagrams even when
c() (net/ipv4/raw.c). Datagrams are no longer limited to the
interface MTU size if the IP_HDRINCL option is set, but are fragmented, if
necessary, in the same way as all other datagrams.
Signed-off-by: Alan Davey
---
net/ipv4/raw.c | 5 -
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/ipv4/raw.c b/n
known bug.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Regards
Alan Davey
