Wireshark-users: [Wireshark-users] Interpretation of "summary" TCP/IP packets?
Date Prev · Date Next · Thread Prev · Thread Next
From: "Templin (US), Fred L" <Fred.L.Templin@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 19:42:37 +0000

Hi,

 

On a pair of Ubuntu linux laptops (call them A and B) connected via a 1Gbps link, I am

running “iperf3 –c” on node A and “iperf3 –s” on node B. Also on node B I am running

wireshark on B’s “eth0” interface to capture the traffic. When I start the wireshark

capture, and then start the iperf3 test, the capture shows “summary” TCP/IP packets

instead of the “real” packets.

 

I call them “summary” packets because their length is much larger than 1500 bytes (the

MTU of the link connecting A and B). For example, I see packets with lengths like 20338,

29026, etc. When I use wireshark to examine the IP headers of these “summary” packets,

the IP length field reflects these larger values and shows the packets as non-fragmented

IP packets, which makes no sense because the largest non-fragmented IP packet possible

is only 1500 bytes.

 

When I put a router (call it R) between nodes A and B and run wireshark on R, what I see

is the “summary” packet followed by N 1500 byte packets that cover the same sequence

number space as for the summary packet. This begins to make sense to me because the

smaller packets fit inside the path MTU. But, the “summary” packet sill shows up in the

wireshark capture.

 

Can someone explain to me what is going on here?

 

Thanks - Fred