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)