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.