nanog mailing list archives
Re: Well done Sprint!
From: Ex-Support Wench <alex () shell2 tiac net>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 19:32:15 -0500 (EST)
What do y'all think of pathchar *as it is now*? How reliable is it for determining actual _available bandwidth_? I thought according to VJ, CAIDA, Cisco and even the NSF it was "way-alpha"? Steve Blair wrote:
well, one could get Van Jacobson's pathchar, and learn the true capacity that way. I could care less what *theoretical bandwidth* is available, when customers complain. I want to know what bandwidth *is available*, and pathchar goes a very long way towards that end. link labelling could be arguably silly, if you're basing your determination on a competetitor's labels, you could get some unusual surprises IMHO... -- steve c blair tivoli systems inc sblair () dev tivoli com "Why can't we blast them onto someone else's property?" 'Vadim Antonov writes...' **> **> There's no use in promoting corporate paranoia at the expense of **> engineering cooperation. It is like butcheing the hen which lays **> the golden eggs. Knowing link capacity was useful (while it lasted) **> to get the idea of what is more likely to be dropping packets **> on the floor when customers complained.
Current thread:
- Well done Sprint! Neil J. McRae (Nov 12)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Bob Collie (Nov 12)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Josh Beck (Nov 14)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Well done Sprint! Scott Huddle (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Vadim Antonov (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Steve Blair (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Dorian R. Kim (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! SK Miller (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Vadim Antonov (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! cll (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Craig A. Huegen (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Network Operations Center (Nov 13)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Henry Kilmer (Nov 14)
- Re: Well done Sprint! Randy Bush (Nov 14)