> 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
