On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 09:50:35 -0800, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote:
> (Looks like you missed the last update I mentioned)
I did not miss it. The proposed behavior is inconsistent and has no
clear pattern (I used the word "magic" for that). I guess examples will
help more. See below.
> Here
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:48 AM, Jiri Benc wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 09:34:13 +0100, Jiri Benc wrote:
>> I don't think this works currently. When someone (does not have to be
>> you, it can be a management software running in background) sets the
>> MTU to the current value, the magic behavior
On Fri, 12 Jan 2018 09:34:13 +0100, Jiri Benc wrote:
> I don't think this works currently. When someone (does not have to be
> you, it can be a management software running in background) sets the
> MTU to the current value, the magic behavior is lost without any way to
> restore it (unless I'm miss
On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 08:59:58 -0800, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote:
> I guess the logic would be as simple as - if mtu_adj for a slave is
> set to 0, then it's
> following master otherwise not. By setting different mtu for a slave, you will
> set this mtu_adj a positive number which would mea
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 8:59 AM, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:25 AM, Jiri Benc wrote:
>> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:09:50 -0800, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote:
>>> I still prefer the approach I had mentioned that uses 'mtu_adj'. In
>>> that approach you can
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 3:25 AM, Jiri Benc wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:09:50 -0800, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote:
>> I still prefer the approach I had mentioned that uses 'mtu_adj'. In
>> that approach you can leave those slaves which have changed their mtu
>> to be lower than masters'
On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 18:09:50 -0800, Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote:
> I still prefer the approach I had mentioned that uses 'mtu_adj'. In
> that approach you can leave those slaves which have changed their mtu
> to be lower than masters' but if master's mtu changes to larger value
> all other
On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 11:21 PM, wrote:
> From: Keefe Liu
>
> The MTU of ipvlan interface should not bigger than the phy device, When we
> run following scripts, we will find there are some problems.
> Step1:
> ip link add link eth0 name ipv1 type ipvlan mode l2
> ip netns add ne
From: Keefe Liu
The MTU of ipvlan interface should not bigger than the phy device, When we
run following scripts, we will find there are some problems.
Step1:
ip link add link eth0 name ipv1 type ipvlan mode l2
ip netns add net1
ip link set dev ipv1 netns net1
Step2:
