Re: packet loss (was re: mae-west congestion)
Peter Kaminski wrote:
Matthew Kaufman writes about the Ames FDDI ring saturation:
What I don't understand is why that has _stayed_ saturated... it seems to me that some of the big players would have rerouted their traffic by now to avoid subjecting it to this, which would also have the side effect of causing the problem to, at least for the short term, go away.
...or why MFS hasn't installed a Gigaswitch there, or whatever. We're seeing 20% - 30% packet loss through AGIS to MCI and Sprintlink during the day, and it's not fun.
Speaking of fddi rings, saturation, and packet loss.. has anyone taken a look at the peering between mcinet and cicnet at the chicago nap? i get about the same (20-30%) packet loss during the day. and no, it's not fun at all. -- panic@cyborganic.com
On Sat, 23 Mar 1996, nicholas harteau wrote:
Peter Kaminski wrote: Speaking of fddi rings, saturation, and packet loss.. has anyone taken a look at the peering between mcinet and cicnet at the chicago nap?
i get about the same (20-30%) packet loss during the day.
???? Umm.. we are not currently at the Chicago NAP. We peer with MCI at their Willowsprings hub over the transit DS3 we have with them. -dorian ______________________________________________________________________________ Dorian Kim Email: dorian@cic.net 2901 Hubbard Drive Network Architect Phone: (313)998-6976 Ann Arbor MI 48105 CICNet Network Systems Fax: (313)998-6105 http://www.cic.net/~dorian
participants (2)
-
Dorian Kim -
nicholas harteau