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

From: Joe Shen (no email)
Date: Mon May 07 2007 - 03:16:41 EDT

  • Next message: Scott Weeks: "RE: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec"

    I agree with Dale. The problem should be with e2e TCP
    performance.

    Maybe there is misconfigured firewall which block SYN
    or ACK packet. Or, packet larger than 128B is dropped.

    As you can find in your data, ping and traceroute show
    different response speed.

    Maybe you could try layer4 traceroute, and try packet
    size bigger than 1000Byte. It will show you where the
    problem may exist.

    Joe

    ICMP or traceroute usually use small packet.

    --- Joe Maimon <> wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    > Lincoln Dale wrote:
    >
    > >>traceroute/tcptraceroute show packet loss and MUCH
    > higher rtt than the
    > >>corresponding direct pings on the reported hop
    > entries.
    > >>
    > >>Is this some sort of massaging or plain just
    > "faking it"? Or is such
    > >>things merely net-urban myth?
    > >
    > >
    > > the vast majority of routers on the internet
    > respond very differently to
    > > traffic 'directed at them' as opposed to traffic
    > 'routed through them'.
    >
    > Thanks for your reply.
    >
    > I did include icmp echo directly to each hop as a
    > comparison.
    >
    >
    >

          
    ____________________________________________________
    Yahoo! Singapore Answers
    Real people. Real questions. Real answers. Share what you know at http://answers.yahoo.com.sg


  • Next message: Scott Weeks: "RE: barak-online.net icmp performance vs. traceroute/tcptraceroute, ssh, ipsec"





    Hosted Email Solutions

    Invaluement Anti-Spam DNSBLs



    Powered By FreeBSD   Powered By FreeBSD