On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Ben Pfaff <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:blp@nicira.com">blp@nicira.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div class="im">On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 12:08:45AM -0700, Jesse Gross wrote:<br>
> GRE checksums aren't really all that useful because they only<br>
> add value for the GRE and inner Ethernet header. However, they<br>
> are expensive since they cover the entire packet, even though<br>
> most of the data is protected by L3 and L4 checksums. Therefore<br>
> disable checksumming by default to improve performance. In addition,<br>
> since CAPWAP doesn't support checkums this makes it consistent with<br>
<br>
</div>"checksums"<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Hmm, "checkums" sounds like the Southern version of checksums...</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<br>
> GRE.<br>
<br>
Looks good. Would it be worthwhile to explain the tradeoff, as you do<br>
above, in vswitch.xml?<br>
</blockquote></div><br><div>Good idea, I added that.</div>