nanog mailing list archives
Re: IP over SONET considered harmful?
From: "Sean M. Doran" <smd () clock org>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 05:20:28 -0800
| A more flexible 'knob' would be cool, something like combining the 'cos'
| bits in the labels with the decision to decremening or not. This will give
| the management station the power to 'trace' even the regular trace packet
| can't do.
No, no, no, no, no. You are confusing TTL expiration with
"visibility".
You have a trade off between size of forwarding loop and
TTL decrement. The longer it takes to decrement a TTL to 0
in a forwarding loop, the worse the loop's effects will be.
What you want -- and I think you are very strange for wanting it,
by the way, but I will supply you a solution anyway -- is a knob
that modifies the ICMP ttl exceeded message that is sent back
to the source.
Sean.
Current thread:
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful?, (continued)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 21)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Paul Ferguson (Mar 21)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 21)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 21)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 22)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 22)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Vadim Antonov (Mar 22)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 22)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Mike Trest (In Japan) (Mar 22)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Peter E. Giza (Mar 23)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 24)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Peter Lothberg (Mar 27)
- Re: IP over SONET considered harmful? Sean M. Doran (Mar 21)
