On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 4:16 PM Javier J <javier@advancedmachines.us> wrote:
Is anyone from Verizon on this list? They probably are but not allowed to comment. I would love to know if there is an official comment on why they do this.
It annoyed me when they first implemented and I was trying to diagnose an issue with a client.
Regarding your edge device: Same here, I had ubiquity gear at my GW for a while and before that PFsense.
When i saw 1ms responses to a ping one day I was confused.
Well, yes, but you *did* see a 1ms ping response. I'm sure no ISPs would intentionally configure their networks to artificially improve their latency measurements on certain automated tools, so I don't know why that would be a useful outcome... W
- J
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 12:51 PM Peter Beckman <beckman@angryox.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019, Javier J wrote:
If you have static addressing (biz account) then possibly different from what I have.
In North NJ, 3 different accounts I can verify have ICMP blocked as of sometime earlier this year or late last year so have to use udp to get a real traceroute.
Could not be deployed in all areas the same way.
I noticed this about the same time I installed Ubiquiti gear at home, December 2018.
Until this thread, I thought there was something wrong with my gateway router config. I could do UDP/TCP traceroutes, but ICMP kept dying.
Glad to know it isn't my gateway, but frustrated as hell that Verizon decided that a few customers doing less-than-ideal things was enough to cut a standard network protocol off at the knees.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Beckman Internet Guy beckman@angryox.com http://www.angryox.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf