mdz at alcor.net
Thu Aug 26 11:46:27 CDT 2004
On Thu, Aug 26, 2004 at 04:40:21PM +0200, Pierfrancesco Caci wrote:
> May I recommend that you ship "traceroute-nanog" instead of
> "traceroute" ?
> Those that work in NSPs/ISPs will appreciate, all the others will
> probably just not even notice.
Unfortunately, traceroute-nanog is quite a mess internally, and has a
history of security issues, so I do not think it is a suitable replacement.
The extra features are available for those who wish to install the package
from universe, with the understanding that it is not officially supported.
Indeed, I would prefer to avoid traceroute in the default install entirely,
in favour of tracepath, but I fear this would cause too much confusion, as
users are accustomed to typing 'traceroute' and the tools are not
command-line or feature compatible. tracepath does provide the basic level
of expected functionality, though, and with far fewer security risks.
More information about the sounder