Authoritative Resources for Public DNS Pinging

Thu Feb 10 16:43:25 UTC 2022

>
> I'm not going to opinion on the quantity of benefits, but this thought
> could lend a razor from Occam.
>

I always enjoy a good shave from ol' Occam,no worries.

On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 2:54 AM Saku Ytti <saku at ytti.fi> wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Feb 2022 at 22:19, Tom Beecher <beecher at beecher.cc> wrote:
>
> >> Side note, am I missing something obvious where I can’t just have
> hardware routers strip ICMP, pipe it separately, put 500 VMs behind 4 vLBs
> and let the world ping the brains out of it?
> >
> > Seems like a lot of overhead for zero benefit.
>
> I'm not going to opinion on the quantity of benefits, but this thought
> could lend a razor from Occam. NPU based boxes, like JNPR Trio, NOK
> FP, Huawei Solar, CSCO Lightspeed et.al. could easily respond to ICMP
> echo and TTL exceeded in NPU for microseconds of delay and nanoseconds
> of jitter at higher performance and lower cost compared to transing
> it, i.e. ping responder would become negative cost. Only reason they
> don't is because customers are not asking for it.
>
> Further, we could have a global anycast address, like we already have
> for 6to4 relays, where a well-known ping responder exists. And anyone
> who welcomes responding to pings, configures this address to all the
> device loopbacks which they want to include, advertise those loopbacks
> in IGP or iBGP and advertise the /24 aggregate in eBGP.
>
> --
>   ++ytti
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20220210/7af79606/attachment.html>