nanog mailing list archives
Re: Headscratcher of the week
From: Blake Dunlap <ikiris () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 23:18:51 -0500
I agree with previous poster, table size progression and corresponding increase in search delay, probably related directly to the monitoring itself, or at least a connection state of some kind. On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Jake Khuon <khuon () neebu net> wrote:
On 31/05/13 17:30, Brett Frankenberger wrote: How can you possibly have consistent increase in latency likethat? I'd love to hear theories (or offers of beer, your choice!).Variation of the buffer filling theory is that there's some QoS/traffic-shaping going on which is causing your ping packets to get classed and policed into an ever depleting buffer pool. I wonder what would happen to the pattern if you reset the interface. |8^) -- /*=================[ Jake Khuon <khuon () NEEBU Net> ]=================+ | Packet Plumber, Network Engineers /| / [~ [~ |) | | -------- | | for Effective Bandwidth Utilisation / |/ [_ [_ |) |_| NETWORKS | +=============================**==============================**=======*/
Current thread:
- Re: Headscratcher of the week Brett Frankenberger (May 31)
- Re: Headscratcher of the week Jake Khuon (May 31)
- Re: Headscratcher of the week Blake Dunlap (May 31)
- Re: Headscratcher of the week Jake Khuon (May 31)