<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Doomy</i>
<br />Hi TM,[/br]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Heya iR ! [

]
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
However, I would like to know what the overhead of PPPoE vs USB will be on 2.4.x as opposed to 2.6.x
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I've found 2.6 more feature complete. As for overhead, the USB device can talk at 12Mb/s, so latency, etc is comparable to the PPoE connection
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">
I am seriously thinking of upgrading the System to Suse 9.1 when it comes out as it contains a full 2.6.x kernel as default ( especially due to the smp updates). So it means having to think about whether pppoe (limited to MTU of 1492) may not be a good choice if usb has a better MTU.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Unfortunately, the maximum MTU the RAS servers at Sentech seems to want to handle over PPP, is 1450. I haven't played around too much with trying to force this, perhaps I'll find a way to do that.
The problem with not using PPPoE is that you have to add an iptables rule to your forwarding chain, to clamp the tcp MSS, otherwise all machines that the gateway is natting for has to have their MTU's adjusted. Roaring penguin PPoE has a built-in option for doing this, which is neat. When using stock USB, and the modem you have to add the following rule.
Code:
iptables -A FORWARD -p tcp --tcp-flags SYN,RST SYN -j TCPMSS --clamp-mss-to-pmtu
<center><h5><font color="red">Oo.
MyWireless <s>Hacks</s> Tweaks & Tech Info.oO </font id="red"></h5></center>