- Test - lists.nanog.org

floods
by gary keen 27 Jun '97

27 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 27 Jun '97

27 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 27 Jun '97

27 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 27 Jun '97

27 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 27 Jun '97

27 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

Re: Internet Backbone Index
by sob＠academ.com 27 Jun '97

27 Jun '97

> They could be. The attempt is to factor that out. ALL measuring agents > applied to ALL the backbones. And all contributed more or less equally to > the end numbers. If a particular agent ran on a Commodore 64 with a kluged > copy of KA9Q, and another agent ran on an Sun Solaris, both results would > go into the result pile for all 29 measured networks. The net effect > would be that the flaw would be in our "footprint" from which the > measurements were taken. This footprint can only be a rough approximation > of end user distribution anyway. It would affect absolute values relative > to zero, but the relative indexes between networks should not be affected. > Since we're looking at the relative relationship primarily, it wouldn't > appear important. > > > Jack Rickard Jack, you appear to be saying that the ranking is the important issue, but that the actually timing numbers are not important. Will you clarify this for me? The web page does not say what the configuration of the "high performance workstations" are and there is the possibliity that the artifacts could be so large that none of the data is meaningful. If you are saying that the "high performance workstations" vary from "a Commodore 64 with a kluged copy of KA9Q, and another agent ran on an Sun Solaris", you still have not eliminated the possiblity that the artifacts are so big to make the data meaningful. [Although, I note that Keynote does not publish the fact that they run on KA9Q on a Commodore 64 on their web site, so I would assume that none of the agents really do run on that configuaration.] Could you possibly get more detail on these configurations? -- Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob(a)academ.com Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: {mcsun|amdahl}!academ!sob Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

1 0

Re: Internet Backbone Index
by Jack Rickard 27 Jun '97

27 Jun '97

They could be. The attempt is to factor that out. ALL measuring agents applied to ALL the backbones. And all contributed more or less equally to the end numbers. If a particular agent ran on a Commodore 64 with a kluged copy of KA9Q, and another agent ran on an Sun Solaris, both results would go into the result pile for all 29 measured networks. The net effect would be that the flaw would be in our "footprint" from which the measurements were taken. This footprint can only be a rough approximation of end user distribution anyway. It would affect absolute values relative to zero, but the relative indexes between networks should not be affected. Since we're looking at the relative relationship primarily, it wouldn't appear important. Jack Rickard ---------- > From: Stan Barber <sob(a)academ.com> > To: Justin W. Newton <justin(a)priori.net>; Larry Vaden <vaden(a)texoma.net>; Sean Donelan <SEAN(a)SDG.DRA.COM>; nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: Re: Internet Backbone Index > Date: Friday, June 27, 1997 1:54 PM > > Justin writes: > > ObAboutTopic: This is possibly the most flawed study on the planet. > > Remind me to get a fast web server. (And to think, we were going to put > > our web server in our office, behind a T-1, instead of in real estate near > > where the real bandwidth is that could be used for customers.). > > There are many studies more flawed. Consider some of the studies that > the Tobacco Institute has released over the years about the affects of > smoking. > > Concerning Internet performance, there have always been a variety of ways > of measuring it. It all depends on what you are really trying to measure. > The Keynote study is attempting to measure something to which the average > Internet user (not engineers) can relate. However, There are also clearly > the possibility of artifacts in the data because of the testing machine's > TCP stack or other issues (Vern Paxson has covered these issues at NANOG > and IETF meetings over the last few years). Checking their web site, their > software appears to run on top of the TCP stacks of many systems, so the > known artifacts of some of these platforms could be an issue. > > -- > Stan | Academ Consulting Services |internet: sob(a)academ.com > Olan | For more info on academ, see this |uucp: {mcsun|amdahl}!academ!sob > Barber | URL- http://www.academ.com/academ |Opinions expressed are only mine.

2 1

Re: Network IP analysis?
by Havard.Eidnes＠runit.sintef.no 27 Jun '97

27 Jun '97

> MRTG is a great graphing tool for small applications. Unfortunately > the package does not scale very well for my purposes. The snmp polling > and data storage in the logfiles are areas that I have problems with > using MRTG. Are there any other viable alternatives to MRTG, or are > there any existing mods to mrtg that graph right out of a file rather > than polling for itself? I already have the data I need and would > like to reuse it. If possible I would like to have a package that > is separated into 3 sections. One section can be called upon to > do polling or gathering data out of a repository. The second can > be called upon to do statistics runs. The 3rd can be called to provide > graphs on demand. The package I have been fiddling with on and off for a while and which was recently named "NORDstat" may do some of what you want. It has a simple textual and easily understood (hah!) format for the raw data files, so that it should not be too difficult to convert the data you already have to this format. It has separate modules to produce graphs and tabular textual reports, and the graphs (and the tabular reports++) can be presented via a WWW interface (the WWW setup is even cache-friendly). Some of the plotting scripts fetch the data from the tabular reports, some fetch them directly from the raw data files. I have recently made the package available for testing, you can reach it (together with "live data" for NORDUnet) at http://www.nordu.net/stats/ If there is interest I may set up a few mailing lists for information dissemination about the package, typically an -announce list and list for general discussion of the package. If any of you are interested in this, send me e-mail. Regards, - Håvard

1 0