|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 11:55:45 +0100 (BST) From: Paul Jakma <paul@jakma.org> To: Nick Hilliard <nick@foobar.org> In-Reply-To: <4A9A7011.1010908@foobar.org> Mail-Copies-To: paul@jakma.org Mail-Followup-To: paul@jakma.org Cc: nanog@nanog.org Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Nick Hilliard wrote: > 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. Or some enterprising vendor could start recording utilisation stats? regards, -- Paul Jakma paul@jakma.org Key ID: 64A2FF6A Fortune: Try to value useful qualities in one who loves you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| home | help | back | first | fref | pref | prev | next | nref | lref | last | post |