Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Gentoo Forums
Quick Search: in
[SOLVED] Unable to automatically set the MTU
View unanswered posts
View posts from last 24 hours

Goto page 1, 2  Next  
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Networking & Security
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 4:11 am    Post subject: [SOLVED] Unable to automatically set the MTU Reply with quote

I'm experiencing network issues between two computers connected by ethernet LAN (and yet no internet issues, it's just when they want to talk to each other).
Those seem to disappear when changing the MTU settings to a lower value, 1400 instead of 1500, but I'm having trouble getting this done automatically.
Indeed, every time I reboot the computer it goes back to 1500 (considering this greatly impedes SSH, it gets quite annoying).
Following instructions from a thread concerning a similar problem, I tried:

Setting the MTU from /etc/dhcpcd.conf:
I Added the following line to the top of /etc/dhcpcd.conf:
Code:
static interface_mtu=1492

And added dhcpcd to the default boot level:
Code:
rc-update add dhcpcd default

Which looks like this:
Code:
               binfmt | boot                         
             bootmisc | boot                         
                devfs |                       sysinit
               dhcpcd |      default                 
                dmesg |                       sysinit
                 fsck | boot                         
             hostname | boot                         
              hwclock | boot                         
              keymaps | boot                         
            killprocs |              shutdown       
    kmod-static-nodes |                       sysinit
                local |      default                 
           localmount | boot                         
             loopback | boot                         
              modules | boot                         
             mount-ro |              shutdown       
                 mtab | boot                         
             netmount |      default                 
               procfs | boot                         
                 root | boot                         
            savecache |              shutdown       
                 sshd |      default                 
                 swap | boot                         
            swapfiles | boot                         
               sysctl | boot                         
                sysfs |                       sysinit
         termencoding | boot                         
         tmpfiles.dev |                       sysinit
       tmpfiles.setup | boot                         
                 udev |                       sysinit
              urandom | boot 

Yet, after rebooting, the MTU setting is still set to 1500:
Code:
2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc pfifo_fast state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000
    link/ether 02:99:03:41:ec:c2 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
    inet 192.168.1.202/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global eth0
       valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever

And dmesg tells me:
Code:
[   14.551074] stmmaceth 1c50000.ethernet eth0: Link is Up - 100Mbps/Full - flow control rx/tx
[   17.491319] eth0: must be stopped to change its MTU


Seems like dhcpcd is too late to the party, preventing it from setting the MTU.

Setting the MTU from /etc/conf.d/net:
I set /etc/conf.d/net file to:
Code:
config_eth0="dhcp"
mtu_eth0="1400"

I added net.eth0 to the default boot level, and got:
Code:
[   12.549967] eth0: must be stopped to change its MTU
[   14.301067] stmmaceth 1c50000.ethernet eth0: Link is Up - 100Mbps/Full - flow control rx/tx

The MTU still is 1500, and "ip addr" gives me the same as with the other method.

Setting the MTU manually:
Code:
ip link set eth0 down; ip link set dev eth0 mtu 1400; ip link set eth0 up

The MTU setting is correctly set and everything runs smoothly.

Any idea why the first two methods are not working and how to fix it?


Last edited by POSIX_ME_HARDER on Mon Aug 31, 2015 1:39 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
kurly
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 02 Apr 2012
Posts: 253

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 5:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Smells like bug 555974... does using >=net-misc/dhcpcd-6.9.2 fix the problem?

My apologies if this winds up being a dead end or non-solution.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 6:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thank you for the suggestion. Sadly, using dhcpcd 6.9.2 did not solve the issue.
In the bug report you linked, dhcpcd seems to be able to change the MTU, but restores it to its previous value right away.
In my case, it seems dhcpcd can't set the MTU because the interface is already up.
Is there perhaps a way to tell dhcpcd that it's OK to turn eth0 off to edit the MTU?

My best solution so far is adding a script in /etc/local.d/, but the fact that it doesn't work the way it's supposed to bothers me a bit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 6968

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 11:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry, the best thing to do is looking why your two computers have trouble at 1500 MTU.

MTU are standards values, for eth2 it's 1500 (no more, and no less, exactly that value), pppoe use 1492 (because 1942 for eth2 datas + 8 for ppp headers = 1500 the standard MTU of eth2)

Getting out the of the standard you are not solving your issue like you think, you are adding trouble to your trouble, and you lesser to get any help from anyone and you'll be alone to handle this ; even i know the symptoms of someone silly doing that, i have no clue howto myself handle that, except getting back to the standard ; but if you know someone that understand the MTU mechanic deeply, that must include, how any devices (including the device you have no control over) receiving the packets can be alter to handle it with your non standard way, better make friend with it asap!.

Here's symptoms example, and you can see this user did like you lowering MTU to prevent the MTU trouble his router was doing.
Back to 1500 and really dig at who was causing problem, it has fix it. https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-935256-highlight-mtu.html

Another one, if you like to see where your "i'm altering the MTU because i can" way will drive you : https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-566869-highlight-mtu.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER,

The MTU is unlikely to be your problem. In any case, if its sub optimum, things mostly still work but you get extra packets sent over the link as they need to be broken up. This increases the overhead ... until you get a packet with the do not fragment flag set, so it cannot be sent at all.

First, use ping with various packet sizes and the do not fragment flag set to determine the MTU over the link.
If its 1500 (including headers) the MTU is not your issue.

Its rare to need to change the MTU manually. A few old brain dead domestic routers, don't do PPPoE properly and for them, forcing a MTU of 1492 helps.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sure, let's try something else :D . I focused on the MTU because it seemed to solve the problem but it could indeed be caused by something else.
I think I'll have to give more information about the connection issues then:
My local network has three computers. Two of which (200 and 202) are connected through ethernet and one (201) using WiFi.
200 and 202 have a hard time talking to each other (trying to connect through SSH will hang at "debug1: expecting SSH2_MSG_KEX_ECDH_REPLY" and distcc gets stuck).
They have no issue communicating with 201 however.
Just in case this could be linked (no pun intended), the modem router connecting them gets its Internet from PPPoE (with a 1492 MTU setting), to get to the Internet the modem-router goes through a second router that will handle packet tagging in and out of the VLAN used by my ISP (it's not optimal, but the modem-router can't do it by itself).

Here are the results of my ping tests:

  • 200 <-> 202: If I go higher than 1459 (meaning 1487 total size), there are no replies.
  • 200 <-> 201: I can go up to the maximum size (1500 total, as expected).
  • 201 <-> 202: Same here.
  • 200 <-> Internet: It tells me the maximum MTU is 1492 (as expected? considering how the router is configured...).


The command I used is:
Code:
ping -v -s SIZE -M do IP


From what I've found so far, most people having issues with wrong MTU settings seem to get issues while using the Internet, yet I've only noticed issues in my local network, my Internet works just fine.

It worked just fine when 202 was running Arch Linux ARM (the other two were already using Gentoo), it only started when I installed Gentoo on 202 (it also got an U-Boot update).


Last edited by POSIX_ME_HARDER on Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER,

On the face of it
Code:
200 <-> 202: If I go higher than 1459 (meaning 1487 total size), there are no replies.
is broken.
Post the routing tables from both systems with
Code:
route -n
and tell how the ethernet links that link 200 <-> 202 are set up.
If you do it using /etc/conf.d/net post both net files.

As a test connect 200 <-> 202 with no router in the middle. Just an ethernet cable.
You may need to do some manual set up at each end to get the ethernet link up but getting an MTU of 1500 would show that its not the 200 <-> 202 systems and we can start looking at your router setup.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 2:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here are the current routing tables:

  • 200:
    Code:
    Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
    0.0.0.0         192.168.1.1     0.0.0.0         UG    202    0        0 eth0
    127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
    192.168.1.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     202    0        0 eth0

  • 201:
    Code:
    Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
    0.0.0.0         192.168.1.1     0.0.0.0         UG    303    0        0 wlan0
    127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
    192.168.1.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     303    0        0 wlan0

  • 202:
    Code:
    Destination     Gateway         Genmask         Flags Metric Ref    Use Iface
    0.0.0.0         192.168.1.1     0.0.0.0         UG    2      0        0 eth0
    127.0.0.0       0.0.0.0         255.0.0.0       U     0      0        0 lo
    192.168.1.0     0.0.0.0         255.255.255.0   U     2      0        0 eth0



I'll try connecting 202 to 200 directly and post the results ASAP (it may take a while).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
grosgood
n00b
n00b


Joined: 01 Feb 2015
Posts: 22
Location: Brooklyn, NY

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Curious that the observed problem coincides with the transition from Arch --> Gentoo on 202. Could this have involved physical movement of the machine? A general cleaning of hardware? Vacuuming out dust bunnies? Pulling and reinserting of network cables? A dirty RJ45 plug can host all kinds of network gremlins that don't wake up until the cable is physically disturbed and dust gets in between those little wires.

When you do Neddy Seagoon's test, don't be surprised if the problem disappears. Or maybe put a fresh set of shiny new cables in your present setup and rerun your tests. I've fixed network problems doing nothing more than that.

Good luck!
_________________
Garry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 3:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER,

Your wired ethernet network topology is a 'V' shape, with 200 and 202 on the top of the arms and the router at 192.168.1.1 at the bottom of the 'V'
Its a bit scary that 201 is using WiFi on the same subnet as wired, both from a security point of view and and a routing pount of view. It can be made to work though.

There is nothing there to contribute to your problem.


grosgood,

Its called 'wiping the contacts'. If this is the issue, ifconfig should show errors.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 3:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sorry for the delay, I had never linked two computers directly.

Yup, as you both expected, the problem does not appear when connecting 200 and 202 to each other directly, the MTU is indeed 1500.

I'm surprised the local network topology is considered weird (what I consider weird about my network is the router whose sole role is to tag packets), it's what most ISPs boxes do, right? encrypted WiFi + ethernet.

And yes, I cleaned up 202 just before installing Gentoo. I'll do it again, just in case there's dust in the RJ45 port (it's indeed possible, as the board was quite dusty).

Edit:
:lol: Yup, cleaning up 202 again resolved the problem. Thank you very much to you guys for your time, glad to see this forum actively helps its members. I'll now procede to laughing out loud for a few more minutes about the hours spent trying to fix what was actually just some dust.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 3:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER,

That leaves your cables and your router at 192.168.1.1.

I'm supposed to use Big Thiefs Network Termination Equipment as I'm the UK.
Thats a transparent VDSL to PPoE bridge. I don't need to set the VLAN as its in BTs NTE.

However, if use my own VDSL modem, I need to set the VLAN or I don't get any data.
There is a lot to be said for using my own VDSL modem but as my data rate is at the system provided maximum, I don't bother. Not often anyway.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 4:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I should have done a better test than a simple SSH connection: turns out the reason it works is because 202 rebooted after I cleaned it up and reapplied the local script (I forgot about) to set a 1400 MTU. Now I'm confused, why did it allow 1500 MTU pings earlier (when connecting 200 and 202 directly), despite the fact that the script was still there, I have no idea.

Still, I'll redo the test once more, just to be sure.

I've connected 201 to the network using ethernet instead. Surprise: it suffers the same issue as the others, so clearly the computers on my local network can't communicate using both ethernet and MTU 1500.

Now, let's get to the modem... (although I don't understand why a modem problem would not appear when I was using Archlinux ARM).
It's a "TP-Link ADSL2+ Gigabit Double Bande AC1750", with the firmware "0.9.1 0.12 v002d.0 Build 150514 Rel.33266n", the ISP is "Orange" (France).
I'm connected using EWAN (PPPoE), with a MTU of 1492.
I have no idea what we're looking for.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER,

The routing table from the router would be good

When I first got ADSL, my bandwidth over my network suddenly dropped.
All my local traffic was getting sent over my ADSL link to my ISP and bacK.
Oops. It took me a few days to discover that :)

Even then, a MTU of 1492 should work. Is your router one of these?
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 5:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, it is. I have an optic fiber though (I doubt it changes anything concerning this issue).
I tried using Windows on 200 to ping 202, same results. I don't understand how it could work with Arch before. yet I know it did.
I'll create a thread on TP link's forums as well.

Oh, and since I forgot to do the tests before:

    200 <-> modem: 1500 MTU max.
    202 <-> modem: 1500 MTU max.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 5:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER,

Try tracert and see where the traffic goes.
It should go to the router then to the other PC.

Fibre and only ADSL2+ Ewww.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Code:
>tracert 192.168.1.202
Tracing route to 192.168.1.202 over a maximum of 30 hops
1   <1 ms   <1 ms    <1ms    192.168.1.202
trace complete.


Seems to go directly to the other PC.

I don't understand the comment about using ADSL2 with an optic fiber. :?
It uses a gigabit ethernet port to connect to "the internet" (more like, a second router which will tag its packets), which could actually be causing the issue, I'm guessing, because it says it creates a VLAN to do so. Meaning the speeds are as good as they can be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 6:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER,

I used to get 4Mbit/sec over ADSL2+ without fibre.
I now get 80Mbit/sec with fiber to the cabinet. The last 40m uses the phone line for VDSL.
All the hardware is 100Mbit/sec capable but BT won't let us use it even for money.
While your router is ADSL2+ capable, you are not using the ADSL2+ port for the internet connection. That was confusion on my part.
Sorry about that.

The VLAN may increase your latency but it will not affect youl data rate.

I expected to see your router listed there too.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 6968

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 7:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
the modem router connecting them gets its Internet from PPPoE (with a 1492 MTU setting)

1492 is invalid (always) for a router. It's 1500.
1492 should only be use with pppoe (modem/dialup), if it is connect to an ethernet card, in this case the eth card gets 1492 MTU too, but the card is not directly connect to your lan, you must use a bridge.

So if you are using a real modem, 1492 is fine for it, if it's a modem/router, it must be set to 1500.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 42592
Location: 56N 3W

PostPosted: Sun Aug 30, 2015 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

krinn,

A router has two sides an upstream side (WAN) and a downstream side (LAN).
If the WAN port is a PPPoE endpoint then 1492 is correct on the WAN.
As you say, the LAN side should be 1500.

Route MTU discovery will use 1492 going to the WAN and 1500 to the LAN.

The router may have both 1492 and 1500 MTUs configured on the WAN/LAN.
_________________
Regards,

NeddySeagoon

Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 3:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I tried changing the setting for the PPPoE, 1492 is the maximum value (the interface won't let me go higher), setting it to a lower value does not affect the MTU between PCs of the local network (it does however lower it when testing towards the Internet, as expected).

The router between the TP-Link and the ONT is a "Netgear GS108E v3", it's configured to tag packets comming from the TP-Link and untag those coming from the ONT.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
krinn
Watchman
Watchman


Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 6968

PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And jumbo frames support is disable?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
gordonb3
Apprentice
Apprentice


Joined: 01 Jul 2015
Posts: 185

PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

May I assume that you have the ethernet connected machines hooked up to the TP-Link router? How about using the netgear switch instead? You probably only use 3 of its 8 ports for NT (tagged), internet (untagged) and television (untagged). Simply create a new VLAN ID (e.g. 100) and let the remaining ports be a member of this VLAN ID only. These will now act as a 5(?) port switch that you can use for your LAN.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
UberLord
Retired Dev
Retired Dev


Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 6737
Location: Blighty

PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:33 am    Post subject: Re: Unable to automatically set the MTU Reply with quote

POSIX_ME_HARDER wrote:
I'm experiencing network issues between two computers connected by ethernet LAN (and yet no internet issues, it's just when they want to talk to each other).
Those seem to disappear when changing the MTU settings to a lower value, 1400 instead of 1500, but I'm having trouble getting this done automatically.
Indeed, every time I reboot the computer it goes back to 1500 (considering this greatly impedes SSH, it gets quite annoying).
Following instructions from a thread concerning a similar problem, I tried:

Setting the MTU from /etc/dhcpcd.conf:
I Added the following line to the top of /etc/dhcpcd.conf:
Code:
static interface_mtu=1492


Any idea why the first two methods are not working and how to fix it?


Ah, that would be my fault.
dhcpcd-6.9.x changed from setting the MTU directly on the interface and instead sets it on each route.
This allows IPv4 and IPv6 to have different MTU's (IPv6 has always set MTU per route) without stamping on each other and works around buggy interface drivers who reset PHY on MTU change.

What I forgot to do was to allow setting the MTU statically rather than just using what was in the DHCP message.
This is fixed here:
http://roy.marples.name/projects/dhcpcd/vpatch?from=19ce3a9e82013deb&to=024f77d3102931ab

Now, I cannot say (or really support) if that fixes the root issue you seem to be having that you're all talking about above - just fixing a dhcpcd bug :)
_________________
Use dhcpcd for all your automated network configuration needs
Use dhcpcd-ui (GTK+/Qt) as your System Tray Network tool
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
POSIX_ME_HARDER
n00b
n00b


Joined: 30 Aug 2015
Posts: 22

PostPosted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm unsure how to check for the jumbo frames.
202 can only go up to 100MBit/s, jumbo frames can only be used on gigabit ethernet, right?
I tested on 200 by setting the MTU to 2000 and pinging the modem-router. I can send packets of (total) size up to 1505 bytes, so I'm guessing that means jumbo frames aren't enabled.

gordonb3 wrote:
May I assume that you have the ethernet connected machines hooked up to the TP-Link router? How about using the netgear switch instead? You probably only use 3 of its 8 ports for NT (tagged), internet (untagged) and television (untagged). Simply create a new VLAN ID (e.g. 100) and let the remaining ports be a member of this VLAN ID only. These will now act as a 5(?) port switch that you can use for your LAN.

I'll try that ASAP.


Last edited by POSIX_ME_HARDER on Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:41 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Gentoo Forums Forum Index Networking & Security All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum