On Tue, Sep 06, 2005 at 10:39:12AM -0400, Adam Rothschild wrote:
On 2005-09-06-10:25:28, Network Fortius <netfortius@gmail.com> wrote:
And how exactly would you interpret the number returned by net_loss (int), in a column called "LOSS", in reference to reachability of a "hop" between two end points [...]
I'd interpret it to mean you're hitting a control plane policer or somesuch, with no actual bearing on end-to-end performance, judging from the diagnostic output you've graciously provided us with.
I find myself giving this lecture several times a week to random "gamer" customers upset that intermediary routers don't reply to their pings at full line rate; I'd expect slightly better critical thinking skills from the posters on this list, but I've been wrong before. :)
And yet, his client had a problem, with that link, and did not have a problem with some other link, which, presumably, did *not* show that indication. Correlation does not imply causation, given, but it's certainly a datapoint. Best Practices of wide-area diagnosis, anyone? Cheers, -- jra -- Jay R. Ashworth jra@baylink.com Designer +-Internetworking------+----------+ RFC 2100 Ashworth & Associates | Best Practices Wiki | | '87 e24 St Petersburg FL USA http://bestpractices.wikicities.com +1 727 647 1274 If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me