Re: Industry standard bandwidth guarantee?

[Ben Sjoberg <bensjoberg () gmail com>]

That 3Mb difference is probably just packet overhead + congestion
control. Goodput on a single TCP flow is always less than link
bandwidth, regardless of the link.

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 6:57 PM, keith tokash <ktokash () hotmail com> wrote:
> I'm sorry I should have been more specific.  I'm referring to the *percentage* of a circuit's bandwidth.  For example 
> if you order a 20Mb site to site circuit and iperf shows 17Mb.  Well ... that's 15% off, which sounds hefty, but I'm 
> not sure what's realistic to expect.
>
> And beyond expectations, I'm wondering if there's a threshold that industry movers/shakers generally yell at their 
> vendor for going below, and try to get a refund or move the link to a new port/box.
>
>
>
>
> > To: ktokash () hotmail com
> > Subject: Re: Industry standard bandwidth guarantee?
> > From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
> > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 19:02:53 -0400
> > CC: nanog () nanog org
> >
> > On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:24:46 -0700, keith tokash said:
> >
> > > Is there an industry standard regarding how much bandwidth an inter-carrier circuit should guarantee?
> >
> > How are you going to come up with a standard that covers both the uplink from
> > Billy-Bob's Bait, Fish, Tackle, and Wifi, where a fractional gigabit may be
> > plenty, and the size pipes that got clogged in the recent Netflix network
> > neutrality kerfluffle?
> >
> > And where your PoPs are (and how many) matters as well - if you have a peering
> > agreement with another carrier, and you exchange 35Gbits/sec of traffic, the
> > bandwidth at each peer point will depend on whether you peer at one location,
> > or 5, or 7, or 15.....