I thought iced-over fiber was a little bit like muffler-bearings. Great excuse if they buy it.
Mike On 4/1/11 6:07 PM, "Owen DeLong" <o...@delong.com> wrote: >It's also especially sensitive to icing induced packet loss. > >Owen > >On Apr 1, 2011, at 7:30 AM, GP Wooden wrote: > >> I wonder on the carrier would survive a DoS attack ... >> >> ----- Reply message ----- >> From: "Scott Morris" <s...@emanon.com> >> Date: Fri, Apr 1, 2011 9:01 am >> Subject: v6 Avian Carriers? >> To: <nanog@nanog.org> >> >> Mmm... Good question. Would it actually come back OUT in a >> recognizable (de-encapsulated) manner? >> >> I'll vote with packet loss, 'cause tunneling seems pretty gross. ;) >> >> Scott >> >> >> On 4/1/11 2:41 PM, Sachs, Marcus Hans (Marc) wrote: >>> I was wondering which April 1st this would happen on. Now I know. >>>So if a v6 carrier swallows a v4 datagram does that count as packet >>>loss or tunneling? >>> >>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6214/ >>> >>> >>> Marc >>> >>> >>> >> >> > >
