> My management has heard (nth-hand) that there is some kind of statement or
> draft associated with the IETF that says that either IP or TCP will not work
> over satellite links with delays longer than 125 milliseconds. Has anyone
> heard of this or is aware of where this may have come from? It sounds like
> propaganda from LEO proponents but if there is any technical merit behind such
> an assertion I definately want to see it...
seems to be working for me. 8^)
hops 2 and 3 on either side of an E1 via intelsat
1 inet-gw (195.200.225.1) 4.773 ms 4.951 ms 4.933 ms
2 uplink.ir.tor.reliable-access.net (195.200.224.33) 570.311 ms 569.834
3 uplink.tor.reliable-access.net (195.200.224.34) 574.027 ms 574.825 ms
4 inet-gw.reliable-access.net (195.200.224.3) 580.588 ms 579.925 ms 577.605 ms
5 151-gw.reliable-access.net (195.200.224.2) 579.785 ms 577.573 ms 576.350 ms
6 205.150.89.209 (205.150.89.209) 587.287 ms 584.674 ms 578.859 ms
7 h4.bb1.tor2.h4.bb1.tor1.uunet.ca (205.150.242.65) 579.274 ms 596.515 ms
8 ns.uunet.ca (142.77.1.1) 582.198 ms 582.868 ms 582.007 ms
hops 19/20 and 21 on either side of a 56K via Anik
18 br-yellowknifea.ntnet.nt.ca (199.247.2.70) 193 ms (ttl=236!) 288 ms (ttl=236!) 275 ms (ttl=236!)
19 br-ssimicro.yk.ntnet.nt.ca (199.247.57.71) 229 ms (ttl=235!) 202 ms (ttl=235!) 209 ms (ttl=235!)
20 * * *
21 192.168.0.2 (192.168.0.2) 1786 ms (ttl=233!) * 1764 ms (ttl=233!)
22 natsiq.nunanet.com (199.247.47.3) 1594 ms (ttl=232!) 1750 ms (ttl=232!) 1770 ms (ttl=232!)
--
[ Jim Mercer Reptilian Research [email protected] +1 416 410-5633 ]
[ The telephone, for those of you who have forgotten, was a commonly used ]
[ communications technology in the days before electronic mail. ]
[ They're still easy to find in most large cities. -- Nathaniel Borenstein ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 14 2000 - 16:14:43 EST