Blockchain and Networking

Fri Jan 12 22:20:28 UTC 2018

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 15:28:19 -0500, William Herrin said:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Dale W. Carder <dwcarder at es.net> wrote:
> >
> > Traceroute or any other path diagnostics comes to mind.

> That's not obvious to me. Assuming the time-exceeded message was modified
> to include the necessary data, how would blockchain authenticate the
> responding router?

And do you really want to do *all* that on every single 'TTL Exceeded' ICMP?  Sounds like
a *really* easy way to DDoS a router....
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 486 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20180112/8a5fc829/attachment.sig>