managed to get some rack time in this evening. some results: 1) to answer the question about the ping response regarding MTU issues. Yes there is an "M" response. my lab set up was quite simple - linear, with the MTU set to 500 on one segment and using extended ping to send a 1500 byte packet. results: first - sending 100-byte packets - works just fine Router_1# Router_1#ping Protocol [ip]: Target IP address: 175.175.1.1 Repeat count [5]: Datagram size [100]: Timeout in seconds [2]: Extended commands [n]: y Source address or interface: l 0 Type of service [0]: Set DF bit in IP header? [no]: yes Validate reply data? [no]: Data pattern [0xABCD]: Loose, Strict, Record, Timestamp, Verbose[none]: Sweep range of sizes [n]: Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 175.175.1.1, timeout is 2 seconds: !!!!! I admire your persistence. A quick look through several IOS versions' >command references, and the master command reference on CCO all indicate >that only a particular subset of the commands you mention below exist. that >suggests to me that any responses other than the documented !.U&?CI may have >been put there for the software and networking guys' testing purposes. I have figured out the confusion. The other codes are for trace, not ping. Ping just outputs U for most errors, even when the router receives a more detailed ICMP message. >also, somewhere in the 11.x range, ping was taken from the system management >section to the troubleshooting section, for whatever reason. It is still in System Management. To find decent documentation on ping you have to go to: Configuration Guides and Command References Cisco IOS Configuration Fundamentals Command Reference System Management Commands Troubleshooting and Fault Management Commands CL: yep - that's where I went Make sure you don't go to Cisco IOS Configuration Fundamentals Configuration, because then you won't see the chart about the character codes. You have to go to the command reference. Note that this is backwards from most examples. Usually more detail would be in the configuration guide. You can also sometimes stumble on information using the search engine which finds documents in Tech Notes. What if you just want to start with Tech Notes? What and where are they? CL:Tech Notes apears to fall under http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/ if you enter numbers after the last / you get various documents titled Tech Notes. I can't find an index page and trying to fake it with FTP doesn't seem to work. ========== CL: ooohhhhh.... lookie here! http://www.cisco.com/public/technotes/serv_tips.shtml this may be the source of the tech notes pages. long lost. Cisco just loves to hide things check it out!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Priscilla >it was of minor >interest to see how the documentation has evolved over time. going back to >the 8.x and 9.x versions I saw a generally quite different organizational >structure. > >They teach us in CCIE class to use the doc CD ( CCO univerCD ) and drill >down. Obviously there are limitations to that approach. Were you checking >the TAC pages? > >Chuck > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >Priscilla Oppenheimer >Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 8:44 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: ping replies [7:10910] > > >I have seen E also, but only with AppleTalk. AppleTalk ping is AEP. IPX >ping has two versions -- Cisco proprietary and Novell compatible. As far as >the other pings and trace routes, I don't know! I intend to find out though! > >In answer to the implied (from Chuck ;-) question as to why I should care >about Cisco's implementation and documentation for ping being bad.... > >Well, I admit Cisco has more important things to worry about. But, what >command gets used the most on a Cisco router? Maybe show ip route. But I >bet it's ping. Why can't they output the results in plain language. Sure we >have all gotten used to !!!, but why can't it just say "reply?" And why has >the documentation for years claimed that all those other character codes >can happen even though they don't seem to happen? > >OK, I'm not going to go so far as to say that Cisco should have a GUI, ugh, >but get with the times, for heavens sake. Maybe configuring class-based >weighted-fair queuing, or policy routing, or dial peers, has to be >complicated, but using ping doesn't have to be! > >And while I'm at it, why is the documentation for ping, buried in the >System Management documentation. Couldn't it be somewhere obvious? And even >in that documentation, the character codes couldn't be found (if I recall). >I had to use the index to find the 20 different versions of the character >code table. > >Using the index did cause me to learn something else. Did you know that >there is an SNA ping? It opens an APPC session. > >Priscilla > >At 02:24 AM 7/4/01, nrf wrote: > >I have seen an 'E', but only with failed Appletalk pings, never in IP. > > > >Question (slightly off-topic, my apologies, Priscilla) - does anybody know > >exactly how Cisco implements ping and trace in non-IP protocols? With > >Appletalk, I presume it has something to do with AEP, but how about a IPX > >trace, what's going on there? Or a Decnet/Vines/Apollo/CLNS/XNS ping, > >what's up with those? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >""Priscilla Oppenheimer"" wrote in message > >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > As we all know, ping is really an ICMP echo. There are many possible >ICMP > > > replies. Now, Cisco could tell the user of the Cisco IOS ping command >the > > > actual reply received, but instead they output a character code. >(Wouldn't > > > want to make the product intuitive, now would we?) I'm trying to get >more > > > data on the character codes. > > > > > > This is not a newbie question. Don't send me the chart of ping reply > >codes. > > > I've already seen about 20 versions of the chart. I'm trying to figure >out > > > what routers really display and why there are so many versions of the > > > chart. Putting together all versions of the chart (plus the A code that >we > > > have all seen but is not listed in Cisco documentation, as far as I can > > > tell), I have developed this list: > > > > > > ! An ICMP echo reply was received. > > > . The sending router or switch timed out while waiting for a reply. > > > U A destination unreachable response was received. > > > N A network unreachable response was received. > > > H A host unreachable response was received. > > > P A protocol unreachable response was received. > > > M Fragmentation was needed and the don't fragment (DF) bit was set. > > > & A time-to-live exceeded message was received. > > > I The user interrupted the test. > > > A The ping was administratively prohibited (blocked by an access list > > > probably). > > > Q A source quench response was received. > > > ? An unknown packet was received. > > > C A packet was received with the congestion-experienced bit set.** > > > > > > Questions: > > > > > > Has anyone ever seen N, H, or P? It seems to me that Cisco just outputs >U > > > if the router receives network, host, or protocol unreachable. > > > > > > Has anyone ever seen M? I couldn't get this to happen in my lab. Is M >even > > > for real or was that an error in one of the versions of the >documentation? > > > > > > Has anyone every seen &? I couldn't get that one to happen either. > > > > > > How about I? That doesn't happen on my routers. Plus one version of the > > > documentation said it was |, not I. > > > > > > And how about the mysterious C? I found out that it's related to RFC >2481, > > > an experimental protocol that adds explicit congestion notification to >IP. > > > Maybe some internal developer asked for this. Cisco clearly favors >helping > > > developers troubleshoot over helping customers troubleshoot. (Sorry, but > > > this ping research has made me angry at Cisco.) > > > > > > Thanks for your help. > > > > > > Priscilla > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________ > > > > > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > > > http://www.priscilla.com >________________________ > >Priscilla Oppenheimer >http://www.priscilla.com ________________________ Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=11030&t=11030 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
