Subject: RE: Packman

From: Sasha Vainshtein <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2003 10:25:05 +0200

Yaakov,
Please see some answers inline.
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
With best regards,
                          Sasha Vainshtein
email:   [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> 
phone:  +972-3-7659993 (office)
            +972-8-9254948 (home)
            +972-58-674833 (cellular)

-----Original Message-----
From: Yaakov Stein [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2003 3:30 AM
To: Sasha Vainshtein
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [PWE3] Packman

Sasha,
... snipped...

 [YJS] By "empty" I mean that the length can be configured
but the payload is all zero. As I said, this tool doesn't
yet support ICMP packets.
[[Sasha]] I could not hear that as I was not present there. And your mail
did not mention it. 
 ...snipped ...

 An alternative explanation that comes to mind is a well-known bug in some
ARP implementations. Its effects on packet arrival jitter and packet loss
have been described in the presentation made by Stephen Casner at NANOG-22,
May 2001.

[YJS] Is this available on-line?
The reason we think IGRP is at fault is the 90 second spacing
of packet losses.
[[Sasha]] I think it can be retrieved from the Packet Design web site. Ifyou
cannot find it there, I can send you a copy. And 90' is also an often used
ARP aging timeout. 
Y(J)S