June 1997 - Test - lists.nanog.org

Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
by Jack Rickard 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

> Okay, point taken, we'll wait until we get the 35 "color glossy photos > with the lines and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one to > explain what each picture means" and then decide how useless/useful the > info is. SO now lets _drop_ it. Arlo Guthrie? Alice's Restuarant. You can have anything you want - ceptin Alice. You're no kid Giza. =================================================================== Jack Rickard Boardwatch Magazine Editor/Publisher 8500 West Bowles Ave., Ste. 210 jack.rickard(a)boardwatch.com Littleton, CO 80123 www.boardwatch.com Voice: (303)973-6038 ===================================================================

1 0

Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
by Jack Rickard 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

Phil: Actually, you have hardly seen ANY of the results of the test. This is probably what has me stymied. You saw a very very simple, summary listing of the average download times comparing 29 networks, issued in a two page press release. The RESULTS of the Survey are contained in TWO articles with about 35 PAGES OF GRAPHS, and ten pages of text or so answering most of this. Copies will go out next week. That there is a lot of opinion of flaws in the logic, absolutely predating any of these people SEEING the results, is awe inspiring. Jack Rickard ---------- > From: Philip J. Nesser II <pjnesser(a)martigny.ai.mit.edu> > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!! > Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 3:05 PM > > We have all seen the results of the survey now and there is a lot of > opinion that there are many flaws in the logic. So the question is what is > a legitimate test? I remember At the Ann Arbor NANOG there was a report on > a project to test reachability, what is the current status of that project? > Is there any strong consensus to perform a similar test that is engineered > without the flaws in this test? > > ---> Phil

2 1

Re: Lots of non-existant networks
by Curtis Villamizar 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

In message <m0whe42-0007zWC(a)rip.psg.com>, Randy Bush writes: > > BTW, it would be most useful to me if there were a single report I could > look at for any problems with my AS. Randy, This might be of interest to other people so I'm expanding the Cc. Would you settle for 3-4 for now? http://engr.ans.net/route-dumps/origin-AS###.html http://engr.ans.net/route-dumps/overlap-ann-AS###.html http://engr.ans.net/route-dumps/overlap-reg-AS###.html If you border ANS: http://engr.ans.net/route-dumps/border-AS###.html Later there will be a page for for any AS regardless as to whether it borders ANS that will provide any problem prefixes that transit that AS (the AS is somewhere in the path other than the origin). These will be of the format: http://engr.ans.net/route-dumps/transit-AS###.html This gives you an easy way to see if there are any problems with your direct customers. If one of the above doesn't exist (as is the case for origin-AS2914.html). I could always just create a page with a name of the format http://engr.ans.net/route-dumps/AS###.html for each AS whether it had problems or not and link to the border, transit, origin, and overlap reports for that AS if any. This isn't done yet. Curtis

1 0

floods
by gary keen 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

I'm doing a project for school.Can you help?what is the scientific principle for floods?Thanks!

2 1

Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
by Jack Rickard 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

I'm not a marketing droid. But only a moron would think that overall performance would NOT affect the download of a web page, which is essentially what you are attempting to say. There are certainly other ways to do it. Approximately Internet User Population raised to Internet User Population worth. Jack RIckard =================================================================== Jack Rickard Boardwatch Magazine Editor/Publisher 8500 West Bowles Ave., Ste. 210 jack.rickard(a)boardwatch.com Littleton, CO 80123 www.boardwatch.com Voice: (303)973-6038 =================================================================== ---------- > From: Ben Black <black(a)zen.cypher.net> > To: Craig A. Huegen <c-huegen(a)quadrunner.com> > Cc: Jack Rickard <jack.rickard(a)boardwatch.com>; Peter Cole <Peter.Cole(a)telescan.com>; nanog(a)merit.edu; marketing(a)keynote.com > Subject: Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!! > Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 2:28 PM > > for an exmple of somewhat more complete and better designed benchmarks of > this type: > > http://www.inversenet.com/about/backgrounder.html#2 > > note that they understand the numerous factors that contribute to overall > performance. only a marketing droid could think downloading 50k worth of > web pages is somehow an indicator of overall performance. > > > b3n

3 3

Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
by Jack Rickard 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

See the July Directory. We show about 30 pages of graphs, including one with an average for each period (nominally 4 hours I think) across the calendar month. ---------- > From: Michael Dillon <michael(a)priori.net> > To: nanog(a)merit.edu; Gene Shklar <GeneShklar(a)keynote.com> > Subject: RE: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!! > Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 2:39 PM > > >Thanks for the suggestions. We're considering doing a follow-up and > >perhaps making > >this a regular feature every 2 or 4 months thereafter. We've received a > >few suggestions > >for methodology changes/enhancements, > > I just thought of another solution to the problem of too many variables. > The numbers that you came up with this time are essentially meaningless > because there are so many variables involved that shift from time to time, > and by taking one month of measurements and boiling it down to a single > number, you simply don't learn anything useful. However, if you were to do > a similar test and come up with a single number for each day and then plot > that number for one month, then it would show some useful info. If a > provider has one bad day, it doesn't blow their average but it is still > clearly visible. And if a provider has 10 bad days, then that is also > visible and is arguably more useful than a single number which might be > seen as implying a slower network. Personally, I would rate an erratic > network as far worse than a slower one. > > > ******************************************************** > Michael Dillon voice: +1-415-482-2840 > Senior Systems Architect fax: +1-415-482-2844 > PRIORI NETWORKS, INC. http://www.priori.net > > "The People You Know. The People You Trust." > ******************************************************** >

1 0

Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
by Jack Rickard 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

Not an entirely whacky concept actually. The way hot potato routing works, this could actually be a "purer" test I suspect of the network internally and a purer test of connectivity of any network to all others cum Internet. At least in the other direction, complementing what we are probably measuring. Unfortunately, it would require the cooperation of the backbones themselves, and a number of them would not find it in their interest, consider it proprietary, etc. etc. ad nauseum. The problem is, that many of these companies benefit in the marketplace from this game of liars poker, and don't WANT ****ANY**** testing or results. Keynote does a "Top 40" study of 40 popular web sites and I believe they make the results available on their web site. It is interesting to observe performance variations of the network as a whole over time. Other than that, we don't have much interest in it. It is indicative of no specific network, but of the Internet in general. Jack Rickard =================================================================== Jack Rickard Boardwatch Magazine Editor/Publisher 8500 West Bowles Ave., Ste. 210 jack.rickard(a)boardwatch.com Littleton, CO 80123 www.boardwatch.com Voice: (303)973-6038 =================================================================== ---------- > From: Peter Cole <Peter.Cole(a)telescan.com> > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Cc: marketing(a)keynote.com > Subject: RE: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!! > Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 11:57 AM > > I would like to see the test run again with the following change. > > >From each provider test the response time of the other 28 sites and not > the providers own web server. Then average the response times for these > other 28 web servers and report that average response time from that > provider. The providers with good connectivity to the rest of the net > should have lower average response time. > > > P.S. One might also be interested in the top one hundred web sites > average response time. > > Peter Cole of Telescan, Inc. (281)588-9155 > Better computing through lack of sleep. > > > ---------- > > From: Golan Ben-Oni[SMTP:bnite@tremere.ios.com] > > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 1997 3:53 PM > > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > > Subject: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index > > > > For shits and grins: > > > > http://www.keynote.com/measures/backbones/backbones.html > > > > -Golan > >

5 4

Cisco access-lists ???
by Robert J. Huey 28 Jun '97

28 Jun '97

I'm looking at Interesting Parameters for flap dampening and I don't know how to write the ACL. How do you write an access list to ignore the network and only look at a range of mask bits? -Robert

2 1

RE: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
by Gene Shklar 27 Jun '97

27 Jun '97

Thanks for the suggestions. We're considering doing a follow-up and perhaps making this a regular feature every 2 or 4 months thereafter. We've received a few suggestions for methodology changes/enhancements, and also several emails so far denouncing our methodology but not explaining why (which is typical of people in many areas -- politics, the environment, economics, whatever -- who disagree emotionally but not intellectually with the conclusions of a study). The current methodology generally shows how a web site connected to a particular backbone appears to the general internet population of users. The results are intended to be a guide (but not the only one) for helping web sites select or evaluate a collocation, hosting, or access provider. Your methodology suggestion would be useful to include because its results would also help end-users select their dial-up ISPs based on the backbone that those ISPs are connected to. Gene Shklar -------------------------------------------------------- Gene Shklar GeneShklar(a)keynote.com Keynote Systems, Inc. voice (415) 524-3011 Two West Fifth Avenue fax (415) 524-3099 San Mateo, CA 94402 main # (415) 524-3000 http://www.keynote.com "A great Internet application experience is all a matter of customer perspective." ---------- From: Peter Cole[SMTP:Peter.Cole@telescan.com] Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 10:57 AM To: nanog(a)merit.edu Cc: marketing(a)keynote.com Subject: RE: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!! I would like to see the test run again with the following change. >From each provider test the response time of the other 28 sites and not the providers own web server. Then average the response times for these other 28 web servers and report that average response time from that provider. The providers with good connectivity to the rest of the net should have lower average response time. P.S. One might also be interested in the top one hundred web sites average response time. Peter Cole of Telescan, Inc. (281)588-9155 Better computing through lack of sleep. > ---------- > From: Golan Ben-Oni[SMTP:bnite@tremere.ios.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 1997 3:53 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index > > For shits and grins: > > http://www.keynote.com/measures/backbones/backbones.html > > -Golan >

4 3

RE: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
by Wheeler, Jesse W 27 Jun '97

27 Jun '97

So are we all going to all resort to name calling now to get our points across? Every time you deal with a dynamic object such as the Internet, where conditions can change on a minute by minute basis, benchmark results are close to useless. The only thing that benchmarks on a dynamic object can do is give you a rough estimate of the actual throughput.. The variables to be tested in something massive as the Internet and too numerous to count.. SO, lets get on with it :) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ Jesse W. Wheeler Quality Assurance Analyst Reynolds & Reynolds Healthcare Systems Division Email: Jesse_Wheeler(a)reyrey.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------------------------------------------------- >---------- >From: Jack Rickard[SMTP:jack.rickard@boardwatch.com] >Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 2:00 PM >To: Ben Black; nanog(a)merit.edu >Subject: Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!! > >I'm not a marketing droid. But only a moron would think that overall >performance would NOT affect the download of a web page, which is >essentially what you are attempting to say. > >There are certainly other ways to do it. Approximately Internet User >Population raised to Internet User Population worth. > >Jack RIckard > >=================================================================== >Jack Rickard Boardwatch Magazine >Editor/Publisher 8500 West Bowles Ave., Ste. 210 >jack.rickard(a)boardwatch.com Littleton, CO 80123 >www.boardwatch.com Voice: (303)973-6038 >=================================================================== > > >---------- >> From: Ben Black <black(a)zen.cypher.net> >> To: Craig A. Huegen <c-huegen(a)quadrunner.com> >> Cc: Jack Rickard <jack.rickard(a)boardwatch.com>; Peter Cole ><Peter.Cole(a)telescan.com>; nanog(a)merit.edu; marketing(a)keynote.com >> Subject: Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!! >> Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 2:28 PM >> >> for an exmple of somewhat more complete and better designed benchmarks of > >> this type: >> >> http://www.inversenet.com/about/backgrounder.html#2 >> >> note that they understand the numerous factors that contribute to overall > >> performance. only a marketing droid could think downloading 50k worth of > >> web pages is somehow an indicator of overall performance. >> >> >> b3n >

1 0