[92530] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: icmp rpf
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (virendra rode //)
Sun Sep 24 20:51:03 2006
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 17:49:39 -0700
From: virendra rode // <virendra.rode@gmail.com>
Reply-To: virendra.rode@gmail.com
To: Mark Kent <mark@noc.mainstreet.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20060924233330.F11E22847D@noc.mainstreet.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Mark Kent wrote:
> virendra rode wrote:
>>> This is yet another reason one shouldn't rely on pings & traceroutes to
>>> perform reachability analysis.
>
> So, you're in the "traceroute is not important" camp?
> (you'll note that in my email I did ask whether we think
> traceroute is important)
- ----------------------------
I'm sure its important. All I'm saying is, icmp can get rate-limited
(many times it does) which could possibly lead to packet loss and even
drops while traversing hops.
regards,
/virendra
>
> Mark Smith wrote:
>>> The non-announcers, because they're also breaking PMTUD.
>
> Really? How? Remember, we're not talking about RFC1918 space,
> where there is a BCP that says we should filter it at the edge.
> We're talking about public IP space, that just doesn't happen to be
> announced outside of a particular AS.
>
> Thanks,
> -mark
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFFFyejpbZvCIJx1bcRAsFXAKDokAbujtIiuvGDXss2Tt5U3CXElQCgkpKG
UaS6MDxtWKjdbiLewujDs/Q=
=qgo2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
