nanog mailing list archives
Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold
From: Nick Hilliard <nick () foobar org>
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 13:26:57 +0100
On 30/08/2009 13:04, Randy Bush wrote:
the normal snmp and other averaging methods *really* miss the bursts.
Definitely. For fun and giggles, I recently turned on 30 second polling on some kit and it turned up all sorts of interesting peculiarities that were completely blotted out in a 5 minute average.
In order to get a really good idea of what's going on at a microburst level, you would need to poll as often as it takes to fill the buffer of the port in question. This is not feasible in the general case, which is why we resort to hacks like QoS to make sure that when there is congestion, it is handled semi-sensibly.
There's a lot to the saying that QoS really means "Quantity of Service", because quality of service only ever becomes a problem if there is a shortfall in quantity.
Nick
Current thread:
- Link capacity upgrade threshold devang patel (Aug 29)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Justin Wilson - MTIN (Aug 29)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold William Herrin (Aug 29)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 29)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Patrick W. Gilmore (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Richard A Steenbergen (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Mikael Abrahamsson (Aug 29)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Randy Bush (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Nick Hilliard (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Peter Hicks (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Shane Ronan (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Nick Hilliard (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Kevin Oberman (Aug 30)
- RE: Link capacity upgrade threshold Erik L (Aug 30)
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Mohacsi Janos (Aug 31)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Link capacity upgrade threshold Bill Woodcock (Aug 30)