Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!labrea!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!hedrick From: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: A new record? Message-ID:Date: 11 May 88 04:29:15 GMT References: <8805062353.AA23117@mimsy.umd.edu> <4512@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 11 To: chris@mimsy.umd.edu In article <8805062353.AA23117@mimsy.umd.edu> chris@MIMSY.UMD.EDU (Chris Torek) writes: >PING okeeffe.berkeley.edu (128.32.130.3): 56 data bytes >64 bytes from 128.32.130.3: icmp_seq=11. time=253239. ms >64 bytes from 128.32.130.3: icmp_seq=294. time=1070. ms > >So where *was* that packet for four minutes and 13 seconds? Presumably in various gateway queues. However you might also check your ping to make sure it handles timing correctly when lots of packets are being dropped. One could imagine a bug that would cause it to report a time for the wrong one. This has happened to TCP implementations, as I'm sure you know.