[121054] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: I don't need no stinking firewall!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Dobbins, Roland)
Fri Jan 8 21:15:04 2010
From: "Dobbins, Roland" <rdobbins@arbor.net>
To: NANOG list <nanog@nanog.org>
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 02:11:57 +0000
In-Reply-To: <4B47D331.1040706@bogus.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Jan 9, 2010, at 7:52 AM, Joel Jaeggli wrote:
> see my post in the subject, a reasonably complete performance report for =
the device is a useful place to start.=20
The problem is that one can't trust the stated vendor performance figures, =
which is why actual testing is required. I've seen instances in which actu=
al performance is 5% or less of vendor assertions (i.e., vendor constructed=
a highly artificial scenario in order to be able to make a specific claim =
which doesn't hold up in real life). =20
Also note that most vendors don't perform negative testing, astonishing tho=
ugh that may seem.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Roland Dobbins <rdobbins@arbor.net> // <http://www.arbornetworks.com>
Injustice is relatively easy to bear; what stings is justice.
-- H.L. Mencken
