Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved L2/Switching/VLANs
    55 Posts 5 Posters 4.0k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • V
      virtual-frog
      last edited by

      To clarify, I've been talking in terms of the pfSense input value, which automatically gets 40 subtracted from it. So the actual MSS would be 1460-4 = 1456.

      johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • V
        virtual-frog @johnpoz
        last edited by virtual-frog

        @johnpoz I performed a packet capture on WAN as you suggested. MSS=1456 when my VLAN MSS is set to 1496 (WAN left at default), MSS=1460 when VLAN MSS is on the default (non-working) setting.

        M johnpozJ 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • johnpozJ
          johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @virtual-frog
          last edited by johnpoz

          @virtual-frog again no idea what you talking about... Here input into pfsense as the router..

          From a vlan tagged packet..

          tagged.jpg

          An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
          If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
          Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
          SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • M
            michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @virtual-frog
            last edited by

            @virtual-frog again you are fundamentally misunderstanding what MSS is and the role MTU plays when it comes to fragmentation.

            https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/network-layer/what-is-mss/

            https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/network-layer/what-is-mtu/

            Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
            Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
            Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
            Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
            JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • V
              virtual-frog
              last edited by

              Ok I have found that the ICMP packets are not making it back to negotiate MTU. See this capture with VLAN on the top and WAN on the bottom.

              Screenshot from 2023-06-13 23-39-29.jpg

              It raises a several questions: Why is the ICMP not making it through? Shouldn't it be allowed as part of the same stream? I'm not too familiar with firewalls.. Why does it need to be fragmented to begin with? The IP datagrams are 1500 bytes each (the 1514 shown in the length field includes the whole Ethernet frame). Why do VLANs affect this at all? As you mentioned the VLAN ID is stripped out, so it shouldn't affect outgoing packets.

              I compared this capture to one from the LAN (no VLAN) and they have the same opening, but on LAN the connection is successful with no complaints from the server:

              Screenshot from 2023-06-14 00-44-35.jpg

              Sorry for my confusion earlier, I see that MSS was not the real issue and lowering it just happened to alleviate the problem (for TCP anyways).

              johnpozJ V 5 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • johnpozJ
                johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @virtual-frog
                last edited by johnpoz

                @virtual-frog said in Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs:

                MSS=1456 when my VLAN MSS is set to 1496

                So question for you.. What is the mtu size set on pfsense interfaces and your client on this vlan? the standard 1500?

                Can you client ping pfsense with DF set at 1472? example

                $ ping -l 1472 -f 192.168.9.253
                
                Pinging 192.168.9.253 with 1472 bytes of data:
                Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=1472 time<1ms TTL=64
                Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=1472 time<1ms TTL=64
                Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=1472 time<1ms TTL=64
                Reply from 192.168.9.253: bytes=1472 time<1ms TTL=64
                
                Ping statistics for 192.168.9.253:
                    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
                Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
                    Minimum = 0ms, Maximum = 0ms, Average = 0ms
                
                $ ping -l 1473 -f 192.168.9.253
                
                Pinging 192.168.9.253 with 1473 bytes of data:
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                

                Now do the same test out to say google.com

                $ ping -l 1473 -f 8.8.8.8
                
                Pinging 8.8.8.8 with 1473 bytes of data:
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                Packet needs to be fragmented but DF set.
                
                Ping statistics for 8.8.8.8:
                    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 0, Lost = 4 (100% loss),
                
                $ ping -l 1472 -f 8.8.8.8
                
                Pinging 8.8.8.8 with 1472 bytes of data:
                Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=68 (sent 1472) time=11ms TTL=58
                Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=68 (sent 1472) time=10ms TTL=58
                Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=68 (sent 1472) time=10ms TTL=58
                Reply from 8.8.8.8: bytes=68 (sent 1472) time=10ms TTL=58
                
                Ping statistics for 8.8.8.8:
                    Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
                Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
                    Minimum = 10ms, Maximum = 11ms, Average = 10ms
                
                

                An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • V
                  virtual-frog @johnpoz
                  last edited by

                  @johnpoz Screenshot from 2023-06-14 00-58-18.png

                  I can ping both google and my firewall at 1472. If I turn off the MTU checking flag I can ping my firewall at much larger packet sizes, they will just get fragmented. Note that Google is one of the sites that I don't have issues with.

                  For duckduckgo (one of the sites I do have problems with) I can ping only up to 64. At 65 it hangs with no MTU warning - although I don't get any fragmentation ICMP replies on a WAN packet capture, so maybe their site is configured to drop any pings larger than 64 bytes.

                  johnpozJ 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • johnpozJ
                    johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @virtual-frog
                    last edited by

                    @virtual-frog said in Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs:

                    Why is the ICMP not making it through

                    Huh.. that is sending you that frag needed.. That mtu needs to be smaller.. What site is that exactly? You saying that happens on all sites?

                    1514 is normal length that would be shown in wireshark..

                    Your trying to talk to duckduckgo.com ? I am not having any issues with that site and normal 1460

                    duckducck.jpg

                    And yes with the 14 byte header frame in wireshark would be shown as 1514

                    frame.jpg

                    An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                    If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                    Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                    SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • johnpozJ
                      johnpoz LAYER 8 Global Moderator @virtual-frog
                      last edited by johnpoz

                      @virtual-frog said in Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs:

                      so maybe their site is configured to drop any pings larger than 64 bytes.

                      I do believe that is the case.. Larger pings to that site are not working for me either.

                      edit: look in their synack back, they send a mss of 1440

                      msssynack.jpg

                      your seeing the same thing on yours..

                      edit: not sure what you got going on as of yet. But your mss value of 1456 is higher then what they are saying to talk to them at anyway..

                      An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools
                      If you get confused: Listen to the Music Play
                      Please don't Chat/PM me for help, unless mod related
                      SG-4860 24.11 | Lab VMs 2.8, 24.11

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • V
                        virtual-frog @virtual-frog
                        last edited by

                        @johnpoz

                        Yes, duckduckgo is the site I'm trying to get to. It works fine without VLAN - they are identical handshakes but the server doesn't send any fragmentation messages back:

                        Screenshot from 2023-06-13 23-39-29.jpg

                        I compared this capture to one from the LAN (no VLAN) and they have the same opening, but on LAN the connection is successful with no complaints from the server:

                        Screenshot from 2023-06-14 00-44-35.jpg

                        How does it know the difference?? Maybe there is a flag somewhere in there that I am overlooking..

                        I have cleared the MSS setting so I should have 1460 from now on.

                        It looks like it is just duckduckgo. I recall having more issues in the past but now it is just that site. Setting my PC's MTU to something lower like 1400 gets me through, but I'd prefer the PMTUD to work properly.

                        M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • M
                          michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @virtual-frog
                          last edited by

                          @virtual-frog PMTUD needs to be supported on all devices in the path. Sadly it isnt as ISPs block icmp.

                          Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
                          Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                          Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                          Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
                          JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • V
                            virtual-frog @virtual-frog
                            last edited by

                            @michmoor

                            Ok I have found that the ICMP packets are not making it back to negotiate MTU. See this capture with VLAN on the top and WAN on the bottom.

                            Screenshot from 2023-06-13 23-39-29.jpg

                            It is not blocked by my ISP. You can see the ICMP packets arrive at my WAN but not make it through the firewall for some reason.

                            M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • M
                              michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @virtual-frog
                              last edited by

                              @virtual-frog The internet is made up of hundreds of carriers. PMTUD to function properly needs to be working end to end. So if it works on one path thats great. My ISP blocks pings so PTMUD would never work for me.

                              Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
                              Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                              Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                              Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
                              JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

                              V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • V
                                virtual-frog @michmoor
                                last edited by

                                @michmoor

                                So there are two issues here:

                                Why is it not working on my pfSense instance, where my ISP does not block ICMP?

                                How would it work when your ISP does block ICMP? Do most routers run MTU black hole detection? MTU is not something that a typical home user would be messing with, so I'm wondering how this issue doesn't pop up more often.

                                M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • M
                                  michmoor LAYER 8 Rebel Alliance @virtual-frog
                                  last edited by

                                  @virtual-frog said in Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs:

                                  MTU is not something that a typical home user would be messing with, so I'm wondering how this issue doesn't pop up more often.

                                  The issue pops up all the time. ISPs may misconfigure a link to support a low MTU. Who knows.
                                  PTMTUD relies on ICMP. You cannot force every single router in the world to not block ICMP which is why pmtud often doesnt work.

                                  In your case as its already been demonstrated, a lower than 1500 byte MTU in the path with the DF bit set is whats breaking access to certain sites. The only workaround is to make sure that your packet sizes that you send out into the world are less than 1500 bytes.

                                  Firewall: NetGate,Palo Alto-VM,Juniper SRX
                                  Routing: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                                  Switching: Juniper, Arista, Cisco
                                  Wireless: Unifi, Aruba IAP
                                  JNCIP,CCNP Enterprise

                                  V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • V
                                    virtual-frog @michmoor
                                    last edited by

                                    @michmoor said in Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs:

                                    The issue pops up all the time.

                                    But not on typical consumer home networks (no PPPoE, IPsec, VLANS, etc). I've set up several "routers" over the years with various locales and ISPs and never once had an issue where a major site fails to connect like this. Is it the result of everyone using 1500 for the MTU by convention, so things "just work"?

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • JKnottJ
                                      JKnott @virtual-frog
                                      last edited by

                                      @virtual-frog said in Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs:

                                      and some external router was refusing to fragment

                                      Are you getting any ICMP too big messages? The source is supposed to respond to that.

                                      BTW, the world is moving to Path MTU Discovery (PMTUD). It's mandatory on IPv6 and now being used on IPv4. The client should be able to handle those ICMP messages and reduce the packet size.

                                      PfSense running on Qotom mini PC
                                      i5 CPU, 4 GB memory, 32 GB SSD & 4 Intel Gb Ethernet ports.
                                      UniFi AC-Lite access point

                                      I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...

                                      V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • V
                                        virtual-frog @JKnott
                                        last edited by

                                        @JKnott

                                        Look at my packet captures earlier in the thread to see the ICMP "fragmentation needed" packets making it to my WAN but not back to the VLAN side.

                                        Yes, we have been discussing PMTUD already. It is not working because the ICMP messages are being blocked by the firewall (not making it back to my client).

                                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • JKnottJ
                                          JKnott @virtual-frog
                                          last edited by

                                          @virtual-frog said in Adjust MSS calculation to account for VLANs:

                                          But internet access only works when I have MSS=1496 on my VLAN interface.

                                          I have the default 1500 on my guest WiFi VLAN. It works fine for me. However, VLANs should have no effect on what goes out to the Internet, as the VLAN tags is discarded by pfSense.

                                          PfSense running on Qotom mini PC
                                          i5 CPU, 4 GB memory, 32 GB SSD & 4 Intel Gb Ethernet ports.
                                          UniFi AC-Lite access point

                                          I haven't lost my mind. It's around here...somewhere...

                                          V 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • V
                                            virtual-frog @JKnott
                                            last edited by

                                            @JKnott

                                            Yes, I know VLANs should not affect internet traffic. But somehow they do. Look at my packet captures to see how I can connect on LAN (untagged) but face issues on my VLAN.

                                            RobbieTTR 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post
                                            Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.