Re: rate limiting Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-29 Thread Mike MacCana
On Fri, 2003-08-29 at 00:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > ** Reply to note from Glen Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:39:20 +0930 > > Fellas, how about using rate limiting. Linux has marvellous > > QoS features, enough to allow a few ICMP ECHOs for fault > > diagnosis but to deny a

Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-28 Thread Andrew McNaughton
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Glen Turner wrote: > Fellas, how about using rate limiting. Linux has marvellous > QoS features, enough to allow a few ICMP ECHOs for fault > diagnosis but to deny a ping flood. > > > Note that its probably not a good idea to block ICMP source quench > > packets. > > Nah, b

rate limiting Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-28 Thread lists
** Reply to note from Glen Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Thu, 28 Aug 2003 13:39:20 +0930 > Fellas, how about using rate limiting. Linux has marvellous > QoS features, enough to allow a few ICMP ECHOs for fault > diagnosis but to deny a ping flood. where/how to do so ? Voytek Eymont -- SLUG - S

Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-28 Thread Glen Turner
David Fisher wrote: Would some kind person please try pinging the addresses 202.12.88.42 or 202.12.88.106 and let me know the results, please? I need to test the ICMP block on my router from external ping traffic. Great, another path MTU discovery black hole, another undiagnosable network. Fellas

Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-26 Thread David Fisher
On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 16:33, Anthony Wood wrote: > Probably not the results you were looking for... > > You should probably post a follow-up to say you don't need any more > help either. > You're right. And that is enough, thanks, folks. -- David Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. --

Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-26 Thread Eddie F
TED]> To: David Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: SLUG List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [SLUG] Ping me please! Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 14:30:21 +0800 seems to be working #ping 202.12.88.42 PING 202.12.88.42 (202.12.88.42) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 202.12.88.42 ping statistics --- 3 p

Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-26 Thread Andrew McNaughton
G List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [SLUG] Ping me please! > > seems to be working > > #ping 202.12.88.42 > PING 202.12.88.42 (202.12.88.42) 56(84) bytes of data. > > --- 202.12.88.42 ping statistics --- > 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time

Re: [SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-26 Thread Adam Hewitt
seems to be working #ping 202.12.88.42 PING 202.12.88.42 (202.12.88.42) 56(84) bytes of data. --- 202.12.88.42 ping statistics --- 3 packets transmitted, 0 received, 100% packet loss, time 1999ms [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ ping 202.12.88.106 PING 202.12.88.106 (202.12.88.106) 56(84) bytes of data. --

[SLUG] Ping me please!

2003-08-26 Thread David Fisher
Would some kind person please try pinging the addresses 202.12.88.42 or 202.12.88.106 and let me know the results, please? I need to test the ICMP block on my router from external ping traffic. -- David Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group - http://