This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/ipv6-wg@ripe.net/
[ipv6-wg] v4 versus v6 -- who connects faster?
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] v4 versus v6 -- who connects faster?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] v4 versus v6 -- who connects faster?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Philip Homburg
pch-ripeml at u-1.phicoh.com
Mon May 23 16:35:11 CEST 2016
> Even though I am only interested in TCP connect times, there is no > TCP-layer test available on RIPE Atlas. Therefore, I leverage TLS > and then look at the underlying metrics reported for TCP. > > Moreover, I cannot do TLS measurement to port 80 because the test > does not like to report TCP layer metrics in situations where the > TLS handshake fails. I did discuss this with Philip Homburg at the > hackathon. One possibility is to either a) refactor the TCP metrics > into a specific TCP test or b) make the TLS test report TCP metrics > even in situations where TLS handshake fails. I personally prefer > b). This not correct/complete. The Atlas traceroute measurement supports TCP. There is no reason to assume that this will not result in valid connect times. Just use a high enough starting ttl and only the target system will see the SYN packets. Philip
- Previous message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] v4 versus v6 -- who connects faster?
- Next message (by thread): [ipv6-wg] v4 versus v6 -- who connects faster?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ ipv6-wg Archives ]