<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic PAN-308564 Known Issue in Advanced SD-WAN for NGFW Discussions</title>
    <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-sd-wan-for-ngfw/pan-308564-known-issue/m-p/1253658#M62</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I could not help notice that all of the latest and preferred 11.1.x, 11.2.x and even 12.1.x all have the following known issue.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;TABLE class="table colsep rowsep  table-striped"&gt;
&lt;TBODY class="tbody"&gt;
&lt;TR class="row"&gt;
&lt;TD class="entry"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="p"&gt;&lt;STRONG class="ph b"&gt;PAN-308564&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;TD class="entry relcol"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="p"&gt;Packets are dropped on SD-WAN interfaces if they require fragmentation for an interface but have the&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="ph uicontrol"&gt;Don't Fragment (DF)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;bit set. This results in unexpected packet drops. This affects client to server sessions when using SD-WAN for NGFW.&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV class="p"&gt;&lt;STRONG class="ph b"&gt;Workaround:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;Allow fragmenting packets with DF bit set (&lt;SPAN class="ph userinput"&gt;debug dataplane set ip4-ignore-df yes&lt;/SPAN&gt;).&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;/TR&gt;
&lt;/TBODY&gt;
&lt;/TABLE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What I am curious about is because this sounds like expected IP behavior. When a DF bit is set and the packet exceeds the MTU, it gets dropped.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8900" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;RFC 8900 - IP Fragmentation Considered Fragile&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The only thing if this is an issue is in cases where PMTU (ICMP Type 3, Code 4) is being black holed.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Given this KB:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA14u0000004ONDCA2" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;Effects Of Interface MTU on SDWAN VIF - Knowledge Base - Palo Alto Networks&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I find that all my IPSec tunnel based SDWAN VIFs have a MTU of 1432, as expected.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-unlink="true"&gt;RFC8900 describes a scenario that may be relevent to SDWAN path logic. (Section&amp;nbsp;3.2. Policy-Based Routing)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So I tested it.&amp;nbsp; I had one path with a underlay MTU of 1500 and another path with a MTU at 1432.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The SDWAN VIF properly showed a MTU of 1432. (Expected as per the KB above)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As the bug report described above, I experienced a flurry of dropped packets due to fragmentation in my tests.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;After placing a MSS clamp (adjustment of 109) and the problem of drops went away.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This lead me to hypothesis that the issue with&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG class="ph b"&gt;PAN-308564&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;may be that the SDWAN VIF may be black holing PMTUD.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;No quesiton here, just sharing my recent observations.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2026 01:12:35 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>JosephBedard</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2026-05-08T01:12:35Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>PAN-308564 Known Issue</title>
      <link>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-sd-wan-for-ngfw/pan-308564-known-issue/m-p/1253658#M62</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I could not help notice that all of the latest and preferred 11.1.x, 11.2.x and even 12.1.x all have the following known issue.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;TABLE class="table colsep rowsep  table-striped"&gt;
&lt;TBODY class="tbody"&gt;
&lt;TR class="row"&gt;
&lt;TD class="entry"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="p"&gt;&lt;STRONG class="ph b"&gt;PAN-308564&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;TD class="entry relcol"&gt;
&lt;DIV class="p"&gt;Packets are dropped on SD-WAN interfaces if they require fragmentation for an interface but have the&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN class="ph uicontrol"&gt;Don't Fragment (DF)&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;bit set. This results in unexpected packet drops. This affects client to server sessions when using SD-WAN for NGFW.&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;DIV class="p"&gt;&lt;STRONG class="ph b"&gt;Workaround:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/SPAN&gt;Allow fragmenting packets with DF bit set (&lt;SPAN class="ph userinput"&gt;debug dataplane set ip4-ignore-df yes&lt;/SPAN&gt;).&lt;/DIV&gt;
&lt;/TD&gt;
&lt;/TR&gt;
&lt;/TBODY&gt;
&lt;/TABLE&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;What I am curious about is because this sounds like expected IP behavior. When a DF bit is set and the packet exceeds the MTU, it gets dropped.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8900" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;RFC 8900 - IP Fragmentation Considered Fragile&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The only thing if this is an issue is in cases where PMTU (ICMP Type 3, Code 4) is being black holed.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Given this KB:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?id=kA14u0000004ONDCA2" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;Effects Of Interface MTU on SDWAN VIF - Knowledge Base - Palo Alto Networks&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I find that all my IPSec tunnel based SDWAN VIFs have a MTU of 1432, as expected.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-unlink="true"&gt;RFC8900 describes a scenario that may be relevent to SDWAN path logic. (Section&amp;nbsp;3.2. Policy-Based Routing)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;So I tested it.&amp;nbsp; I had one path with a underlay MTU of 1500 and another path with a MTU at 1432.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;The SDWAN VIF properly showed a MTU of 1432. (Expected as per the KB above)&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;As the bug report described above, I experienced a flurry of dropped packets due to fragmentation in my tests.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;After placing a MSS clamp (adjustment of 109) and the problem of drops went away.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;This lead me to hypothesis that the issue with&amp;nbsp;&lt;STRONG class="ph b"&gt;PAN-308564&lt;/STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;may be that the SDWAN VIF may be black holing PMTUD.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;No quesiton here, just sharing my recent observations.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2026 01:12:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://live.paloaltonetworks.com/t5/advanced-sd-wan-for-ngfw/pan-308564-known-issue/m-p/1253658#M62</guid>
      <dc:creator>JosephBedard</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2026-05-08T01:12:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

