|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Access to the Internic Blocked
Curtis Villamizar <[email protected]> writes (to Vadim Antonov): > Oh come on. Like they're not going to get caught stuffing an entire > T1 with LSRR packets. Face it. You're grabbing at > straws. Can I grab at one too? I'd love to see LSRR (and SSRR) dead because it slows down single-path forwarding considerably, and complicates fast-path/slow-path systems in gross ways for what I believe is minimal added utility. Some folks may have run across more uses for one or the other that involve more than 'traceroute -g' or 'telnet @foo:bar', both of some utility, I suppose, but one is easily replaced with application-level proxying, and the other is just weird. Or vice-versa. Of course, I don't have a religious feeling about this, since I try to persuade my vendor(s) to supply routers which can handle tiny Christmas-tree packets (those that are fully decorated with options) at line speed without loss. Then again, I work for a company with deep pockets that can afford what it takes to buy per-packet time budgets that can satisfy that kind of design criterion... (Others may want to consider encouraging people to keep fast Internetworking cheap by using things like MTU discovery and getting rid of things like IP options) Sean. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|