Wow! Given your CCIE number you must be using a REALLY old router for that
ping. Most newer models send five echo requests, not three. Either that or
some packets got lost somewhere...
Fred Reimer - CCNA
Eclipsys Corporation, 200 Ashford Center North, Atlanta, GA 30338
Phone: 404-847-5177
-
From: Reimer, Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2003 9:26 AM
To: Brian McGahan; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: ping [EMAIL PROTECTED] [7:74702]
Wow! Given your CCIE number you must be using a REALLY old router for
that
ping. Most newer models send five echo requests
Eric W wrote:
All I am still fairly new with ACL's. However I m interested in
blocking ICMP to my network behind router A (Interface e0/1 = my
network). But when a icmp request is issued from the outside
the router
replys with packet filtered from (interface e0/0 = outside
network) ACL
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 9:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Ping Reply (Packet Filtered) [7:74365]
Eric W wrote:
All I am still fairly new with ACL's. However I m interested in
blocking ICMP to my network behind router
'no ip unreachables'
Thanks,
Zsombor
Eric W wrote:
All I am still fairly new with ACL's. However I m interested in
blocking ICMP to my network behind router A (Interface e0/1 = my
network). But when a icmp request is issued from the outside
the router
replys with packet filtered from
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Ping Reply (Packet Filtered) [7:74365]
Eric W wrote:
All I am still fairly new with ACL's. However I m
interested
in
blocking ICMP to my network behind router A (Interface e0/1
=
my
network). But when a icmp request is issued from the
outside
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 9:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Ping Reply (Packet Filtered) [7:74365]
Eric W wrote:
All I am still fairly new with ACL's. However I m interested
in
blocking ICMP to my network behind
Thanks all.. Solved all my problems.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 11:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Ping Reply (Packet Filtered) [7:74365]
'no ip unreachables'
Thanks,
Zsombor
Eric W wrote:
All I
by default the exit interface
-Nakul
s vermill wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Vital wrote:
This issue came up today during a round table on a real problem
we were having and no-one seemed to know the answer.
Router A has a loopback address address and redundant paths to
David Vital wrote:
This issue came up today during a round table on a real problem
we were having and no-one seemed to know the answer.
Router A has a loopback address address and redundant paths to
router F. If I do a ping or traceroute from rA to rF what Ip
address will be used to
Thanks.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=73206t=73196
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can only ping the internal int on the pix if you are sitting on the
inside. You would also need to issue the command telnet x.x.x.x inside.
You can never cross an interface to get to another interface on a pix for
the purpose of ping or telnet. You must always use the interface closest to
: 81. 3497.3029
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer
To:
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Frederico Madeira wrote:
Dave
A: GW= 10.61.2.1 / HOST: 10.61.2.2
B: GW= 10.60.60.9 / HOST: 10.60.60.8
Oppenheimer
To:
Sent: Sunday, June 22, 2003 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Frederico Madeira wrote:
Dave
A: GW= 10.61.2.1 / HOST: 10.61.2.2
B: GW= 10.60.60.9 / HOST: 10.60.60.8
A -- B
Traceroute from host in A to host B:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tef]$ traceroute 10.60.60.8
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Frederico Madeira wrote:
Dave
A: GW= 10.61.2.1 / HOST: 10.61.2.2
B: GW= 10.60.60.9 / HOST: 10.60.60.8
A -- B
Traceroute from host in A to host B:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] tef]$ traceroute 10.60.60.8
traceroute to 10.60.60.8
: 81. 3497.3029
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: MADMAN
To: Frederico Madeira
Cc:
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Really, interesting as more info is getting out!!
What happens if you trace from a host on the B
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: MADMAN
To: Frederico Madeira
Cc:
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Really, interesting as more info is getting out!!
What happens if you trace from a host on the B LAN
Ltda
PABX: 81. 3497.3029
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: MADMAN
To: Frederico Madeira
Cc:
Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 1:49 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Really, interesting as more info is getting out!!
What happens
-
From: MADMAN
To: Frederico Madeira
Cc: ;
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
If you can ping host to host from router A's LAN to router
B's LAN
the routers are working.
Humor me, can you ping the remote LAN on router B from
router
Frederico Madeira wrote:
Hellow,
i have a problem in conectivity of my two fr networks.
If i ping from any host on LAN1 to any host on LAN2 he works fine, but if i
ping from router1 to any host on LAN2, dont4t work.
I understand becouse in two cases the packet trought for same router in
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Frederico Madeira wrote:
Hellow,
i have a problem in conectivity of my two fr networks.
If i ping from any host on LAN1 to any host on LAN2 he works fine, but
if i
ping from router1 to any host on LAN2, dont4t work.
I understand becouse in two
: Friday, June 20, 2003 2:31 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
Frederico Madeira wrote:
Hellow,
i have a problem in conectivity of my two fr networks.
If i ping from any host on LAN1 to any host on LAN2 he works fine, but
if i
ping from router1 to any host on LAN2, dont4t work
Hi,
Remember that when you ping from the console the source address will be the
interface where the packet exists. Therefore I suggest you do an extended
ping and specify the source address as the ethernet address. I'm pretty sure
you will see this is the problem.
Cheers,
Message Posted at:
. 3497.3029
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: MADMAN
To: Frederico Madeira
Cc: ;
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: Ping Problems [7:70980]
If you can ping host to host from router A's LAN to router B's LAN
the routers are working.
Humor me, can
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: ping things [7:66155]
OK If I use the loopback addr then I can see ext trace going right way.
Now I need to make the rtr use this addr as the source
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66477t=66155
Encapsulation failed appears because of arp failing. Try debug arp and
please could you paste show int f3/0 instead of show ip int fa3/0 ?
Regards.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66478t=66472
--
FAQ, list archives,
I wonder about the encapsulation type for the interface?
JB
Xy Hien Le wrote:
I have an issue that took me almost a month and still not
figure out what's
the problem?
I can ping out to a connected router (fastethernet or any type
of interfaces)
and can only ping the local interface.
Xy Hien Le wrote:
00:28:14: IP: s=1.1.1.2 (local), d=1.1.1.1 (FastEthernet3/0), len 100,
encapsulation failed
Might this be the problem:
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/63/ping_traceroute.html#addres_pro
What does a 'show ip arp 1.1.1.1' show on the box that has IP address
1.1.1.2 (and
Encapsulation by default is ARPA.
Can this be changed?
JB
J B wrote:
I wonder about the encapsulation type for the interface?
JB
Xy Hien Le wrote:
I have an issue that took me almost a month and still not
figure out what's
the problem?
I can ping out to a connected router
J B wrote:
Encapsulation by default is ARPA.
Can this be changed?
Yes, it can (try 'encap ?' in interface config mode), but you don't need
to fiddle with that if you don't *know* you do.
Regards,
Marco.
Message Posted at:
Try adding
ip routing
To the config.
AFAIK, in some versions of IOS this is not on by default.
HTH
Dom Stocqueler
CTO SysDom Technologies
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Xy Hien Le
Sent: 30 March 2003 08:44
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
try to change it to full-duplex.:)
Xy Hien Le wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have an issue that took me almost a month and still not figure out
what's
the problem?
I can ping out to a connected router (fastethernet or any type of
interfaces)
and can only ping the local
You can change Ethernet encapsulation if you're using VLANs, i.e. to ISL or
801.1q. You can also change encapsulation if you're using Novell NetWare,
since Novell supports 4 different encpsulations.
But with IP, you can't change the encapsulation. IP is essentially always
Ethernet II, although a
To me everything seems well configured plus Xy says he has been
troubleshooting for one month now.
I would suggest that you upgrade the IOS on this particular router.
Also, does it happens the same if you ping from the other router ?
Regards.
Message Posted at:
)
Thank you all
xy
- Original Message -
From: richard dumoulin
To:
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 10:43 AM
Subject: Re: Ping fail at all interfaces! [7:66472]
To me everything seems well configured plus Xy says he has been
troubleshooting for one month now.
I would suggest that you
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Ping fail at all interfaces! [7:66472]
I have swapped the FastEthernet modules of both routers and still NO
WORK
If I remove the FastEthernet from the TROUBLED router and install it in
another identical model router with identical IOS and both worked just
fine Could
Xy,
The same problem happened to my 3662 last NOV. It drove me crasy. Then I
tried to replace the SDRAM and found out I got a bad SDRAM.
Let try and I hope it helps.
Good luck,
Tu Do
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66532t=66472
Of course. Thanks
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66372t=66242
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL
Engineer
Cisco Systems
- Original Message -
From: srinivas kunthuri
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: PING PROBLEM [7:66132]
Hi Larry,
I did not understand what you are saying. I had pinged my local serial
interface. it is giving
OK If I use the loopback addr then I can see ext trace going right way.
Now I need to make the rtr use this addr as the source
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66237t=66155
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription
I can reach my end node by declaring the loopback address as the source. By
default the router is using the seril i/f address. Unless I use the loopback
as the source it dont work. So I need to understand how to fix this - I
imagine the intervening hops are where the trouble lies
Message Posted
will work on the local end..
With HDLC encap, the router should be able to ping itself IIRC.
Pete
Larry Letterman
Network Engineer
Cisco Systems
- Original Message -
From: srinivas kunthuri
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: PING
PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: ping things [7:66155]
OK If I use the loopback addr then I can see ext trace going right way.
Now I need to make the rtr use this addr as the source
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66241t=66155
The reason it doesn't work is someone somewhere doesn't have a route
to your loopback interface.
Dave
Peter P wrote:
I can reach my end node by declaring the loopback address as the source. By
default the router is using the seril i/f address. Unless I use the
loopback
as the source it
hi i've check the last 2 suggestions and i feel it should work but if it
doesnt try to shut down the interface and then bring it up then use the
command sh int to see if all is up line protocol and all that
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=66262t=66132
At 12:55 PM 3/26/2003 +, Peter P wrote:
I can reach my end node by declaring the loopback address as the source. By
default the router is using the seril i/f address. Unless I use the loopback
as the source it dont work. So I need to understand how to fix this - I
imagine the intervening hops
You need to find out why the routing process does not work with the serial
interfaces..if the loopback works, the serial interfaces should work also...
do you have any configs ?
Larry Letterman
Network Engineer
Cisco Systems
- Original Message -
From: Peter P
To: [EMAIL
Peter P wrote:
When I traceroute or ping to a remote node from Router A - no
reply. If so an extended traceroute or ping using the source's
loopback address - hey presto- all works fine. So how do I get
the route to use its loopback address as the source - rather
than the serial interface.
Larry Letterman
Network Engineer
Cisco Systems
- Original Message -
From: srinivas kunthuri
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: PING PROBLEM [7:66132]
Hi Larry,
I did not understand what you are saying. I had pinged my
I don't know what an SCPC PAMA VSAT is :-), but on many types of WANs you
need a map statement to your own interface to be able to ping it.
It's true what other people said about the router sending a ping out the
serial interface and letting it bounce back from the other end when you ping
your
Orlando Palomar Jr CCIE#11206 wrote:
You have a routing problem. Check your routing tables
thouroughly. I'm sure you're missing some networks.
The reason you're able to ping one-way is because you're using
different sets of source and destination IP addresses when
pinging from router A
You have a routing problem. Check your routing tables thouroughly. I'm sure
you're missing some networks.
The reason you're able to ping one-way is because you're using different
sets of source and destination IP addresses when pinging from router A to
router F, as compared to pinging from router
Several thoughts:
A standard ping uses as its source address the address of the exit
interface.
Extended ping can use the address of any interface on that router.
Do a trace to see where it fails.
Check the routing tables of the various routers.
Somewhere a route is missing.
For example - suppose
At 02:55 PM 3/25/2003 +, Peter P wrote:
I can ping from router A through various hops to router F.
Therefore the packet'knows' how to reach F - and also how to find a path
back to A by reply. However from router F I cannot ping router A.
As the ping works in the first case - ie it knows the
At 04:35 PM 3/25/2003 +, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
Orlando Palomar Jr CCIE#11206 wrote:
You have a routing problem. Check your routing tables
thouroughly. I'm sure you're missing some networks.
The reason you're able to ping one-way is because you're using
different sets of
do a traceroute from F to A and see what it says and email it to
this list...
Larry Letterman
Network Engineer
Cisco Systems
- Original Message -
From: Peter P
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2003 6:55 AM
Subject: ping things [7:66155]
I can ping from router
At 04:35 PM 3/25/2003 +, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
Orlando Palomar Jr CCIE#11206 wrote:
You have a routing problem. Check your routing tables
thouroughly. I'm sure you're missing some networks.
The reason you're able to ping one-way is because you're using
different sets of
To: srinivas kunthuri ; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 1:09 AM
Subject: Re: PING PROBLEM [7:66132]
to ping the serial interface usually it has to go to the remote end and
then
back...make sure the path from end to end is working...
Larry Letterman
Network Engineer
Cisco
sisco wrote:
gurus, :)
Is ping/icmp protocol needs to be prioritized on Lan
environment just
to have a good latency ping result? is it ping a good basis for
measuring
your
network if it is congested? Thanks!
Ping can help you understand if a network is congested if it's just a simple
Hello Priscilla,
Thank you very much for your feedback!
I am yet to try the protocol analyzer... mostly because I don:t have one.
But I DO have a sort of packet sniffer, maybe I can find out something with
that. Debug command, I think I need somebody on the other side to send me
ping packets
Hello Erick,
My understanding is that, with the ethernet MTU being 1500, pinging with the
datagram size of bigger than 1500 byte (with the non-fragment bit set) won't
leave my NIC card. I tried the command anyway, and I got an error message
saying that the packet needs to be fragmented first but
The ATM connection (provider) is probably limiting
payload size to 1500. They may doing some form of
traffic policing - common these days. Ethernet LAN MTU
is 1500 so there really isn't a need to send greater
than that across ATM in this case.
--- Sean Kim wrote:
Hello,
My company has this
How are you doing, Marco?
I actually DID think about this for a bit.
To my knowledge Ethernet MTU is 1500, and ATM MTU depend on the connection.
In my case we have 3M connection, but I am not sure what the MTU is because
I have not looked at my partner company's 'sh int' result. But I would
Hello Erick,
If that's the case, than wouldn't I have problem pinging any nodes (with
over 1500 byte datagram) across the ATM link?
But I do not have pinging any other nodes. It only happens, when I am
sitting on my router pinging the other router's interface and vice-versa...
Sean
Erick B.
Try this ping from the nodes:
ping -f -l 1600 node-on-other-side-of-ATM
If this doesn't ping, then the ATM connection is only
letting 1500 through. The Ethernet router interface is
fragmenting packets to 1500 bytes (1600 packet becomes
2 packets) from the nodes. When doing a ping from the
Someone said Think MTU, but I would say Think IP Fragmentation and
Reassembly. :) In other words, different MTUs isn't supposed to cause a
problem for IP.
However, your partner company could be sending pings with the Don't Fragment
bit set, in which case it would fail, if there really is an MTU
Sean Kim wrote:
There isn't any problem with connection of performance. But I am very
curious about why this is happening.
Does anybody have any idea why this would happen? Or can anybody give me a
clue as to how to approach this problem?
Think MTU difference.
Regards,
I don't think it's an error. The first packet is probably lost while the
router or switch is performing an arp request. That takes a second or two
to come back, then the pings are successful. If you ping again (immediately
after the first time when you loose one packet) you shouldn't see any
The first PING is lost because the source system is performing an ARP
request. The ARP information, once obtained, is cached (remembered) for a
small amount of time. Successive Pings to the host should show all four
replies.
Hope this helps,
Lance
Eduardo Perestrelo wrote in message
[EMAIL
This isn't a Cisco issue, but the byproduct of a missing new entry in
the ARP table. You may know the layer 3 address for this new interface
and the router may know how to route it (i.e. this subnet exists off of
this interface), but it does not yet have the layer 2 address needed for
final
Oops. I mean to make the title say Ping to Directed Broadcast. The original
title Confused from London wasn't meaningful, so I meant to do a good deed
and change it, but changed it to the wrong thing. Hope you understand. :-)
(The meta-message is a strong recommendation that we all use titles
Things like serialization delay, propogation delay, ingress egress
queuing affect links. Also, when dealing with ICMP, keep in mind that
the far end router needs to process and respond to the query, which
might take a lot longer than it would for the router to forward a
packet. Hence, your ping
and responding to an ICMP is not a high priority for the router.
Dave
Peter van Oene wrote:
Things like serialization delay, propogation delay, ingress egress
queuing affect links. Also, when dealing with ICMP, keep in mind that
the far end router needs to process and respond to the
traffic congestion on the circuit
NIGEC Spar Engineers wrote in message
news:200211131018.KAA02102;groupstudy.com...
please could anyone tell me what are the factors that affect a WAN link
ping return time. does the latency has to do with the link quality or the
amount of traffic over the link
This did not work for me could there be something wrong with my pix?
-Original Message-
From: Silju Pillai [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 8:35 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Ping and traceroute throught pix [7:55470]
just give the following commands
Here are some hints,
1- There must be static or global statements to allow the address
translation.
2- You need access list or conduit statement to allow icmp in and out.
3- Use the debug tools to see what the problem is by issuing this command -
debug icmp trace
then try to ping to outside -
Here are some hints,
1- There must be static or global statements to allow the address
translation.
2- You need access list or conduit statement to allow icmp in and out.
3- Use the debug tools to see what the problem is by issuing this command -
debug icmp trace
then try to ping to outside -
just give the following commands...
access-list acl-in permit icmp any any
access-list acl-out permit icmp any any
access-group acl-in in interface inside
access-group acl-out in interface outside
I gave two access-lists to distinguish between inside and outside traffic.
This will allow ping
looks like the web site is gone...
here's a list of cug cisco-users.org/other_cugs.htm
- Original Message -
From: Chuck's Long Road
To:
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 1:35 PM
Subject: PING - Sacramento CA Cisco Study Group Info [7:51320]
any members here? anyone have an e-mail or
Thanks for the replies. Priscilla I tried the ping into both of the networks
in question and have recieved the same results. As an aside, is there an
acceptable level of variance in the results of a ping and what are the side
effects of such a large dicrepancy in the ping response times.
I have
It might be time to break out the sniffer. Have a host copy a file over the
network across the link and look at the general response times it each
packet takes on the acknowledements. Do a variety of tests in this manner.
if you could run netperf, a freeware, across the link that'd be good.
DW
DW wrote:
Thanks for the replies. Priscilla I tried the ping into both of
the networks
in question and have recieved the same results. As an aside, is
there an
acceptable level of variance in the results of a ping and what
are the side
I can't quote an exact number for an acceptable
The devices are both 2610's. I am telnetting to one of the 2610's and
pinging the serial interface / Frame Relay subinterface on the directly
connected devices (Not pinging into the network). The leased line is running
PPP. What is strange is that it is the same result across both links. The
Try pinging into the network. I wouldn't trust the results of pinging the
router's own serial interface. Routers have more important things to do than
respond to pings. I can't say for sure (better read that IOS Architecture
book!), but I think the IOS responds to pings at a low priority. Try
What type of device?
What layer 2 protocol? PPP or HDLC?
What is the source and destination of the ping?
DW wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
I am running 2 WAN links through the same router and have been have
session
disconnect problems recently. I have been
Are you pinging a directly connected interface or something deeper into the
network???
-Original Message-
From: DW [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2002 11:44 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Ping latency [7:50018]
I am running 2 WAN links through the same router
Okay, so ICMP doens't specify a TTL on it's own. Doesn't IP by itself
have a TTL of 255?
Maybe i'm missing something.
Tim
On 11 Apr 2002 01:26:56 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joseph
Ezerski) wrote:
Ok, according to Stevens (TCP/IP Illustrated Vol 1), the ICMP Ping Packet
looks like this:
of sync
with an interpretation of the TTL as a value corresponding to tranmission
time measured in seconds, and probably better corresponds to a hop count.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Timothy Ouellette)
To:
Sent: Thursday, April 11, 2002 2:58 AM
Subject: Re: Ping times? Am
At 11:11 PM 4/10/02, Ouellette, Tim wrote:
The other day while troubleshooting an issue, I saw some pings from out
Tivoli Netview box and it was showing ping times in the 15,000+ ms range. Is
this possible? I though there was a limit on this particular field in the
head. If an of our frame-format
Timoue (timeout!? ;-)
IP TTL is a reverse hop count. The sender sets it to some large number like
255 or 64 or 32 (depending on the OS). Each router decrements it by one. If
that causes the TTL to become zero, then the packet is dead. The router
discards it. The goal is to stop a packet from
Okay, I'm much clearer on this now. So in reality, the IP TTL
doesn't really measure anything anymore, we just need to make sure our
routers decrement it so that a box getting an IP packet with 0 will
discard it any not let it float around the networka aimlessly.
Thanks for the help. Much
Ok, according to Stevens (TCP/IP Illustrated Vol 1), the ICMP Ping Packet
looks like this:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Source quench (destination too busy)
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/63/ping_traceroute.html
Gaz
Laubstein, Stuart wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
What does Q mean as an answer to a ping? Sometimes the ping works(!) and
sometimes I receive the Q's
thanks
Source quench. It's pretty rare to see this. Mac OS sends it (pre Mac OS
X). I don't know if I've seen anything else send it. The idea behind it is
to tell the pinger to slow down.
Priscilla
At 07:31 AM 2/6/02, Laubstein, Stuart wrote:
What does Q mean as an answer to a ping? Sometimes the
What's up Oz! And welcome back!
To stay on topic...
Did we ever figure out the latest version of bootrom for
the 2600 series! Phil ...?
Stefan
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 1:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Brian
Thanks for the response :)
supposingly i do a trace from my router to 202.4.185.101
and it shows the following results :
Type escape sequence to abort.
Tracing the route to 202.4.185.101
1 202.161.130.18 0 msec 0 msec 0 msec
2 12.125.92.37 [AS 7018] 56 msec 52 msec 60 msec
3
I think u need to elaborate a little. Non extended ping just sends 5
packets to the host and spits results. Extended ping lets you manipulate
many facets of the test.
Brian
- Original Message -
From: birdy
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 9:57 PM
Subject: ping and trace
Could be anything!
Verify that show arp in both routers show eachothers IP addresses. Make sure
that addressing is similar (same mask and subnet). Verify that connected
interfaces are up/up (without keepalives being disabled). Can you ping
serial to serial? Ethernet to ethernet?
Michael Todd
To ping all the interfaces, create a list in notepad and
paste it into each router. The key is to change the
ASCII delay in Hyperterminal to something like 500 ms.
Also if you have frame relay interfaces make sure you
have a map for the local interface.
Cheers, Fred.
I would like to
Priscilla,
Actually, I have seen an H. The other day we were testing connectivity to a
new site in Germany. The connection leaves our network via a router that's
at our site and owned by another company. It traverses this other network
and then arrives at the site in Germany at a router, again
1 - 100 of 145 matches
Mail list logo
