On Sun, 2006-07-02 at 16:22, Aaron Konstam wrote: > > > mtr certainly seems to be more useful for the problem you are trying to > solve. I guess I learned something. I don't think I believe the results though. For me it shows up to 50% loss at one point yet 0% for many things beyond it. That doesn't make a lot of sense because the more distant points have to traverse the hop where it claims losses are happening. -- Les Mikesell lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx
