at 3:58 PM chris wrote:
> im guessing this is going to be one of those posts where mtr told him the
> ip of the CMTS or another inside hop has loss because it deprioritizes/rate
> limits ICMP :)
>
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 6:37 PM Seth Mattinen wrote:
>
>> On 12/26/18
Thanks, Seth! I got a quick response from someone at Comcast.
Cheers,
On Wed, Dec 26, 2018 at 3:36 PM Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 12/26/18 15:24, Masood Ahmad Shah wrote:
> >
> > You business support team keep insisting on sending an onsite tech. I
> > explained that I do
Hi there - If someone from Comcast who is smarter than their business
support team could contact me off list, that would be great. There appears
to be very high consistent packet loss for last 3 to 4 days and that is
affecting my internet,
You business support team keep insisting on sending an ons
I don't see any point of using larger Network space for point to point
links or on loopback addresses. To me the best is that 127-Bit prefixes on
IPv6 point-to-point links and /128 on Loopback serves the purpose, and
offers us a lot of advantages such as it prevents us from neighbor
discovery exhau
>
> > On Oct 21, 2016, at 6:35 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > In practice TTLs tend to be ignored on the public internet. In past
> > research I've been involved with browser[0] behavior was effectively
> > random despite the TTL set.
> >
> > [0] more specifically, the chain of DNS r
5 matches
Mail list logo
