Hi bill, Hi Stig, Hi *, bill fumerola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2007 at 03:58:54AM +0200, Stig Venaas wrote: >> I'm not arguing for keeping source routing here, but one quite useful >> thing it can be used for is traceroute. You can for instance trace from >> a remote point in the network towards yourself. This can be very helpful >> when debugging routing problems. First, thank you both for the feedback. Having spent quite some time doing that on the IPv6 internet, i basically got to the conclusion that if you don't precisely know the router you send your packets to (the waypoint that will bounce your traffic based on RH content), you spend more time debugging the reaction of that router than what happens on the path. There are routers that drops traffic, others that reply with ICMPv6 error packets indicating an administratively prohibited condition, others that don't have a route to your next destination, others that do have a route (default ?) but which won't go far, etc When you include multiple waypoints, this gets even more difficult to get some precise information (Even if your tool does not try to be smart on what comes back). I understand the interest and like the boomerang traceroute too but i'm surprised network operators do not have better tools than that to debug and monitor things. > engineers also can use it when setting up, debugging, or for periodic > testing of peering sessions to make sure that the other side isn't doing > anything against the contractual terms of the peer (e.g. overriding the > normal policies that result from standard RIB->FIB route selection). > > examples: > http://ptd.mbo.ma.rcn.net/peerinfo/ > > All peers are requested to enable LSRR on router interfaces facing RCN > peering sessions to facilitate network diagnostics at least during session > activation. > > http://www.via.net/support/support_peer.html > We require that our peers permit LSR, loose source routing, at least at the > border. > > http://www.noc.wiscnet.net/peering/ > We require that our peers permit LSR, loose source routing, at least at > the border for diagnostic purposes. Some questions: - can anyone send LSR traffic to those routers? is it limited? - If it is limited in some way, how is it done? - What tools do you use to test that and what is the frequency of use? (Only traceroute when you have a doubt?) > i don't have an ACM account, but: > http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&id=1016718 Don't have either. I won't give credit only based on the abstract ;-) > without comparable functionality in IPv6, we lose a feature actively in > use (through IPv4) by some networks for verification of proper peering. Is there any place one can ask operators or people that provide peering at exchange points on that. Basically, my question is: is there any consensus on the use of source routing among those people? I know people that prohibit their use. > if i'm out of touch with current policies on peering & LSRR, please let > me know. a+ -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
