Message-ID: <55922E18.2060204@...1227...> Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2015 07:50:16 +0200 From: Arne Schwabe MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1435611582-26553-1-git-send-email-steffan@...1856...> In-Reply-To: <1435611582-26553-1-git-send-email-steffan@...1856...> Subject: Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH] Increase control channel packet size for faster handshakes List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: Steffan Karger , openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Am 29.06.15 um 22:59 schrieb Steffan Karger: > Instead of limiting the control channel TCP/UDP packet payload size at > '100 bytes + real control channel overhead' (~140 bytes ethernet payload), > increase the max TCP/UDP payload size to '1250 bytes - calculated overhea= d' > (~1210 bytes ethernet payload). This decreases the number of packets > required to establish a connection by a factor 10, but still has a > comfortable enough margin to succeed for lower-MTU connections. > > This should especially help out for complex configs (trac #545), but also > for high-latency connections (trac #543). > > Note that this patch does *not* yield an optimal solution, but it is a > simple and rather safe change that will improve connection setup times > significantly. > I have no experience with the code and what happens on a small MTU connection. Are there still very strange small MTU connections (like 56k dialup modems) around? On the other hand the OpenVPN 3.0 also uses 1200ish packet. Arne