nanog mailing list archives
Re: Smurf Amp Nets
From: "Richard Thomas" <buglord () ex-pressnet com>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 1998 13:15:17 -0400
-----Original Message----- From: Richard Thomas <buglord () ex-pressnet com> To: Jon Lewis <jlewis () inorganic5 fdt net> Cc: nanog () merit net <nanog () merit net> Date: Thursday, June 18, 1998 1:09 PM Subject: Re: Smurf Amp Nets
Might want to add a delay considering the amount of bandwidth they will be
receiving if they tried to send out all those probes at once. In a previous message it was stated that a probe uses 4x64bytes, plus amplification by the broadcasts. I just took the SAR offline for about 4 minutes while trying running a SMALL portion of my bcasts through your script on my 28.8k modem, and it didn't even come close to completing that portion. That fact aside you won't get very accurate results if the SAR is so flooded it can't receive the replies. I would suggest they use ping
-s 1 or -s 8 if the timing information is desired.
Woops my bad missed the ''s to protect &, I really WAS firing 'em off all at once =)
Current thread:
- Re: smurf amp nets, (continued)
- Re: smurf amp nets Oystein Homelien (Jun 14)
- Message not available
- Re: smurf amp nets Eric McClelland (Jun 13)
- Re: smurf amp nets Oystein Homelien (Jun 15)
- Smurf Amp Nets Andrew Herdman (Jun 17)
- Re: Smurf Amp Nets Jon Lewis (Jun 17)
- Re: Smurf Amp Nets Oystein Homelien (Jun 18)
- Re: Smurf Amp Nets Jon Lewis (Jun 17)
- Re: Smurf Amp Nets Jon Lewis (Jun 17)
- RE: Smurf Amp Nets Morgan Sarges (Jun 18)
- Re: Smurf Amp Nets Jon Lewis (Jun 17)
- Re: Smurf Amp Nets Karl Denninger (Jun 19)
- Re: Smurf Amp Nets Craig A. Huegen (Jun 19)