> On May 6, 2018, at 21:32, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@toke.dk> wrote: > > Sebastian Moeller <moell...@gmx.de> writes: >>> [...] >>> Yeah, ICMP is definitely treated differently in many places... Another >>> example is routers and switches that have a data plane implemented in >>> hardware will reply to ICMP from the software control plane, which is >>> way *slower* than regular forwarding... >> >> But that "should" only affect the ICMP reflector, no? I always >> assumed that routers will treat ICMP packets that they only pass >> though just like any other IP packet... > > Sure, it depends on what you are pinging...
Ah, okay, I am relieved ;) > >>> Also, ICMP is often subject to >>> rate limiting... etc, etc... >>> >> >> If I understand posts in the nanog list correctly thee is also a >> trend towards limiting UDP as well. > > Eh? That would mean limiting half the internet (QUIC is UDP, for > instance)... Exactly my sentiment when I read it, but I might have misunderstood the amount of limiting... Best Regards Sebastian > -Toke _______________________________________________ Flent-users mailing list Flent-users@flent.org http://flent.org/mailman/listinfo/flent-users_flent.org