Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec

From: Joe Maimon (no email)
Date: Sun May 06 2007 - 21:07:17 EDT

  • Next message: Joe Maimon: "Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec"

    >>
    >>I did include icmp echo directly to each hop as a comparison.
    >>
    >
    > Right, but from what you posted you didn't send 1500-byte packets. My
    > reaction was the same as Lincoln's -- it smells like a Path MTU
    > problem. To repeat -- ping and traceroute RTT from intermediate nodes
    > is at best advisory, especially on timing.
    >
    > I should add -- DSL lines often use PPPoE, which in turn cuts the
    > effective MTU available for user packets. If the PMTUD ICMP packets
    > don't get through -- and they often don't, because of misconfigured
    > firewalls -- you're likely to see problems like this.
    >

    Of course, and thats why I have cut down ip mtu and tcp adjust mss and
    all the rest.

    Not making much of a difference.

    Furthermore, ipsec performance with normal sized icmp pings is what I
    was referring to, and those are nowwhere near full-sized.


  • Next message: Joe Maimon: "Re: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD