On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 06:13:11PM +0100, Martin Husemann wrote:
> > Thus, MSS clamping should not be tied to NAT.
> 
> Ok, maybe not. I'm probably biased as I myself only need it on NAT routers.
> 
> Furthermore I believe routers never should touch anything beyound the IP
> header. NAT already breaks this law.
> 
> If the majority here believes otherwise I'll move the clamping over to
> the ip_output proper and add a "mssclamp" option to route(8), similar to the
> -mtu option.

for the cited esthetic reasons,  I'd prefer it in the ipnat code.  However,
I can see that it might be useful to people with non-NATed machines. Would
it be possible to specify mss clamping with IPNAT, while leaving all other 
aspects of the traffic untouched?

Regards,
	-is