nanog mailing list archives
Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades
From: Etienne-Victor Depasquale <edepa () ieee org>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 17:44:04 +0200
There is rarely a one sized fits all answer when it comes to these things.
Absolutely true: every application has characteristic QoS parameters. Unfortunately, it seems that 5-minute averages of data rates through links are the one-size-fits-all answer ... which doesn't fit all. Etienne On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 5:37 PM Tom Beecher <beecher () beecher cc> wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to measure the basic performance like packet droprates and queue sizes ?Those values should be a standard part of monitoring and data collection, but if they happen to MATTER or not in a given situation very much depends. The traffic profile traversing the link may be such that the observed drop % and buffer depths is acceptable for that traffic, and there is no need for further tuning or changes. In other scenarios it may not be, in which case either network or application adjustments are warranted. There is rarely a one sized fits all answer when it comes to these things. On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 6:25 AM Olav Kvittem via NANOG <nanog () nanog org> wrote:On 12.08.2020 09:31, Hank Nussbacher wrote: At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80% capacity? 90%? 95%? Hi, Wouldn't it be better to measure the basic performance like packet drop rates and queue sizes ? These days live video is needed and these parameters are essential to the quality. Queues are building up in milliseconds and people are averaging over minutes to estimate quality. If you are measuring queue delay with high frequent one-way-delay measurements you would then be able to advice better on what the consequences of a highly loaded link are. We are running a research project on end-to-end quality and the enclosed image is yesterdays report on queuesize(h_ddelay) in ms. It shows stats on delays between some peers. I would have looked at the trends on the involved links to see if upgrade is necessary - 421 ms might be too much ig it happens often. Best regards Olav Kvittem Thanks, Hank Caveat: The views expressed above are solely my own and do not express the views or opinions of my employer
-- Ing. Etienne-Victor Depasquale Assistant Lecturer Department of Communications & Computer Engineering Faculty of Information & Communication Technology University of Malta Web. https://www.um.edu.mt/profile/etiennedepasquale
Current thread:
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades, (continued)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Mark Tinka (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Olav Kvittem via NANOG (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Mark Tinka (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Baldur Norddahl (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Mike Hammett (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Baldur Norddahl (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Tom Beecher (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Radu-Adrian Feurdean (Aug 14)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Mark Tinka (Aug 18)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Etienne-Victor Depasquale (Aug 13)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Louie Lee via NANOG (Aug 14)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Etienne-Victor Depasquale (Aug 15)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Baldur Norddahl (Aug 15)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Radu-Adrian Feurdean (Aug 15)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Etienne-Victor Depasquale (Aug 15)
- Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades Mark Tinka (Aug 18)