On 1.12.2013 11:49, Randy Bush wrote:
Using a 1/10th of a second interval is rather anti-social. I know we rate-limit ICMP traffic down, and such a short interval would be detected as attack traffic, and treated as such. For what it is worth, I used to think the same, until I saw several providers themselves suggest that 1000 packets should be sent, with the 0.1 s interval. So, this is considered normal and appropriate nowadays.
matthew is correct
go back to your old way of thinking. while some providers may tolerate fast pings, few if any grown-ups do. and even thouse who think they do have routing engines which consider all pings as low priority rubbish to be dropped when there is any real work to do.
From router control-plane perspective, rate-limiting should be always expected and result evaluation should take that in account. From router perspective, packet with TTL=1 is handled typically in software, in CPU with limited power (compared to modern hardware) and it's not a primary job of router to answer to each TTL=1 packet - that's correct view. But, provided reports shows ALSO end-to-end packet loss, which never will be caused by control-plane policers on transit routers, these packets will never hit router CPU. And there we talk about basic network neutrality - everyone should treat all data equally, independently of protocol used for data transport. Daniel