[72800] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 2511 line break
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven M. Bellovin)
Tue Jul 27 06:57:24 2004
From: "Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com>
To: Ingo Flaschberger <if@cableone.at>
Cc: Robert Bonomi <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Jul 2004 04:25:41 +0200."
<Pine.LNX.4.60.0407270423300.1665@volatile.cableone.at>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 06:56:30 -0400
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
In message <Pine.LNX.4.60.0407270423300.1665@volatile.cableone.at>, Ingo Flasch
berger writes:
>
>also telnet is sometimes the last chance over "full" lines (encryption
>likes packetloss)
>
This doesn't make much sense. ssh and telnet both run over TCP; TCP
handles any lost packets. If you're talking about IPsec, it was
engineered to make each packet cryptographically independent. The only
possible issue is that ssh packets are somewhat longer, thus rendering
them slightly more expensive to transmit and slightly more liable to
random bit errors. But the latter is very unlikely -- you were talking
about congestion -- and the effect of the former is minimal compared to
the speed of any likely line.
--Steve Bellovin, http://www.research.att.com/~smb
