[96396] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Min)
Mon May 7 21:16:57 2007
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 21:15:29 -0400
From: Min <qiu.min98@gmail.com>
To: "Joe Maimon" <jmaimon@ttec.com>
Cc: nanog <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <02af01c790f8$e6ffa030$046f09cb@ltdbeast>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
After all the discussion, the difference of last hop of the trace
(from original email)
> 15 89.1.148.230.dynamic.barak-online.net (89.1.148.230) 251.923 ms
256.817 ms *
And the ping result
> 64 bytes from 89.1.148.230: icmp_seq=6 ttl=240 time=190 ms
is still quite interesting. I assumed the last hop is the cisco 871
(IP=89.1.148.230).
It will be good to know what cause the difference if you have full
controll of the 871.
Min
On 5/7/07, Lincoln Dale <ltd@interlink.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Lower than 1500 mtu always requires some kind of hack in real life.
> >
> > That would be the adjust-mss which is the hack-of-choice
>
> note that using 'adjust-mss' only adjusts the MSS for TCP.
> it won't do much good for already-encapsulated IPSec traffic with protocol 47
> or tunneled over UDP...
>
>
>
> cheers,
>
> lincoln.
>
>
