nanog mailing list archives
Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery)
From: Deepak Jain <deepak () ai net>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:49:02 -0400
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Thu, 16 Aug 2007, michael.dillon () bt com wrote:How many people have noticed that when you replace a circuit with a higher capacity one, the traffic on the new circuit is suddenly greater than 100% of the old one. Obviously this doesn't happen all the time, such as when you have a 40% threshold for initiating a circuit upgrade, but if you do your upgrades when they are 80% or 90% full, this does happen.I'd say this might happen on links connected to devices with small buffers such as with a 7600 with lan cards, foundry device or alike. If you look at the same behaviour of a deep packet buffer device such as juniper or cisco GSR/CRS-1 the behaviour you're describing doesn't exist (at least not that I have noticed).
Depends on your traffic type and I think this really depends on the granularity of your study set (when you are calculating 80-90% usage). If you upgrade early, or your (shallow) packet buffers convince to upgrade late, the effects might be different.
If you do upgrades assuming the same amount of latency and packet loss on any circuit, you should see the same effect irrespective of buffer depth. (for any production equipment by a main vendor).
Deeper buffers allow you to run closer to 100% (longer) with fewer packet drops at the cost of higher latency. The assumption being that more congested devices with smaller buffers are dropping some packets here and there and causing those sessions to back off in a way the deeper buffer systems don't.
Its a business case whether its better to upgrade early or buy gear that lets you upgrade later.
DJ
Current thread:
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery), (continued)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Randy Bush (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Sean Donelan (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Sean Donelan (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Randy Bush (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Fred Baker (Aug 16)
- RE: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) michael.dillon (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Hex Star (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Stephen Wilcox (Aug 17)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Patrick W. Gilmore (Aug 17)
- RE: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Deepak Jain (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Fred Baker (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Perry Lorier (Aug 18)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 19)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Alexander Harrowell (Aug 21)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 21)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Joe Provo (Aug 19)
- RE: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) michael.dillon (Aug 16)
- Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery) Adrian Chadd (Aug 16)