nanog mailing list archives
Traceroute versus other performance measurement
From: Paul Bradford <paul () adelphia net>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:07:59 -0500
I have been reading NANOG posts for probably 2 years now.. this is my 1st post. I need help with a reality/sanity check. Traceroute is a good tool for checking for routing type problems (loops). Does anyone feel it's a good tool to use for testing "bandwidth".... My obvious answer is it isn't a good tool for that.... One problem I see is that the way traceroute works, if a transport mixes media between say Ethernet to LANE and back to Ethernet you give room for Destination unreachable responses from a trace route because you have to to packet switching medias with a fast cell switched media in between.... packets less than 64k (like traceroute info) are easily lost in the conversion from ethernet to LANE. Does this sound right? Thanks, Paul A. Bradford
Current thread:
- Traceroute versus other performance measurement Paul Bradford (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Ping Pan (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement grisha (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Daniel Senie (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Bruce A. Mah (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Valdis . Kletnieks (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Quark Physics (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Andrew Brown (Nov 29)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Mark Borchers (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Marshall Eubanks (Nov 29)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement smd (Nov 29)
(Thread continues...)
- Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement Ping Pan (Nov 29)