Subject: disman issue REMOPS-6

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 11:17:07 -0400

Dave,

>Disman issue REMOPS-6:

> >    PingCtlEntry ::=
> >       SEQUENCE {
>
> Why are there traceRouteCtlSourceAddress and traceRouteCtlIfIndex
> objects, but not pingCtlSourceAddress and pingCtlIfIndex objects?
> I can imagine that they'd be useful for similar reasons.  For
> example the RTT seen by pings may depend on which source interface
> is used, and whether or not the remote system responds to pings
> may depend on the source IP address (e.g. whether it has any route
> to it).

So perhaps does traceRouteCtlByPassRouteTable. I can add these objects
to a ping entry, however I have always viewed traceroute as a more
sophisticated form of ping and don't think ping needs to have all of the
options that traceroute provides. This is true by the way on most versions
of the commands that I have seen.

Ken

---

From: Dave Thaler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 13:28:24 -0400 (EDT)

> of the commands that I have seen.

I don't disagree with that, but if you're interested in (say)
monitoring RTT over time, you may not want the extra overhead
or time of traceroute.  One option would be to put them in
a separate conformance group if you feel strongly that many
implementations would not want them.

-Dave