|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: icmp rpf
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mark Kent wrote: > A smaller North American network provider, with a modest North > American backbone, numbers their internal routers on public IP space > that they do not announce to the world. > > One of the largest North American network providers filters/drops > ICMP messages so that they only pass those with a source IP > address that appears in their routing table. > > As a result, traceroutes from big.net into small.net have numerous > hops that time out. > > Traceroutes from elsewhere that go into small.net but return on > big.net also have numerous hops that time out. > > We do all still think that traceroute is important, don't we? > > If so, which of these two nets is unreasonable in their actions/policies? > > Please note that we're not talking about RFC1918 space, or reserved IP > space of any kind. Also, think about the scenario where some failure > happens leaving big.net with an incomplete routing table, thus breaking > traceroute when it is perhaps most needed. > > Thanks, > -mark - -------------------------- This is yet another reason one shouldn't rely on pings & traceroutes to perform reachability analysis. regards, /virendra -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFFxP+pbZvCIJx1bcRAnN8AJ0VqiwhNkxUm5MxG8p/hLptiJ1IdQCg7wIB nx2woHkYDzu1+7MBdnOZaEw= =mlPK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|