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.