[ale] MTU's and DSL's

[James P. Kinney III]

On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 17:44 -0400, Dow_Hurst wrote:
> Will you charge the client or yourself? ;)

DUH!! I'm a consultant! Who do you think I'm going to charge?!?! ($%
^#ing write-off jobs...)
> 
> Margarita Time!!!
> Dow
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "James P. Kinney III" <jkinney at localnetsolutions.com>
> Sent: Apr 20, 2005 4:46 PM
> To: Atlanta Linux Enthusiasts <ale at ale.org>
> Subject: Re: [ale] MTU's and DSL's
> 
> On Wed, 2005-04-20 at 14:51 -0400, James P. Kinney III wrote:
> > This has _GOT_ to be a hardware issue with either the DSL "modem" or the
> > upstream router. The packet show DF is set. It's not a PPPoE
> > configuration. 
> 
> Argh! It was an id10T error. During prior testing a eth(x) was set to an
> MTU 768. That had locked all of the vlans down at 768.
> 
> (slinks off to consider a new career in bartending...)
> 
-- 
James P. Kinney III          \Changing the mobile computing world/
CEO & Director of Engineering \          one Linux user         /
Local Net Solutions,LLC        \           at a time.          /
770-493-8244                    \.___________________________./
http://www.localnetsolutions.com

GPG ID: 829C6CA7 James P. Kinney III (M.S. Physics)
<jkinney at localnetsolutions.com>
Fingerprint = 3C9E 6366 54FC A3FE BA4D 0659 6190 ADC3 829C 6CA7
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part