When I checked last week 1 in 4 packets was an ICMP message, so we rate limited ICMP ECHO and ICMP ECHO-REPLY messages.. And it only bugged PING'ers and windows traceroute users.. All those low memory alarms are now no longer plaguing our NMS. Mark -- Mark Segal Director, Network Planning FCI Broadband Tel: 905-284-4070 Fax: 416-987-4701 http://www.fcibroadband.com Futureway Communications Inc. is now FCI Broadband -----Original Message----- From: John Souvestre [mailto:johns@sstar.com] Sent: September 13, 2003 11:53 PM To: jlewis@lewis.org Cc: nanog@nanog.org Subject: RE: 92 Byte ICMP Blocking Problem Hi. I've been running with the service policy version and haven't seen any problem either. I did notice that it seems to block DOS traceroutes, however. John John Souvestre - Southern Star - (504) 888-3348 - www.sstar.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog@merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu] On Behalf Of jlewis@lewis.org Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003 10:18 PM To: William Devine, II Cc: Nanog Subject: Re: 92 Byte ICMP Blocking Problem Importance: High That's really weird. I've been running with route-map nachiworm permit 10 match ip address nachilist match length 92 92 set interface Null0 ip access-list extended nachilist permit icmp any any echo permit icmp any any echo-reply ip policy route-map nachiworm on transit interfaces and the virtual-templates of all our access servers that can do it properly (just blocking echo/echo-reply on the older ones that can't do the policy) and haven't heard about any customer complaints other than "I can't ping" in the places where we've blocked all echo/echo-reply. The routers doing this (7200/7500)'s are all running 12.2(1-3)S. Access servers are running mostly 12.1M or 12.2XB code.