[162157] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mikael Abrahamsson)
Thu Apr 4 00:18:46 2013
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2013 06:18:34 +0200 (CEST)
From: Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@swm.pp.se>
To: joel jaeggli <joelja@bogus.com>
In-Reply-To: <515CFC39.6010803@bogus.com>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On Wed, 3 Apr 2013, joel jaeggli wrote:
> Telling people to get by with even less instrumentation then they have
> already doesn't win you any friends. The solution to bad instruments is
> better instruments not breaking flow meter off the well.
I have pitched the idea in the IETF to have TCP stacks themselves report
IP performance indicators (aggregate) and that a standard for this to be
standardised. No takers so far.
I hate test traffic, I want to know how the real traffic is doing instead.
In my opinion, people are way too happy to inject a lot of "useless" test
traffic.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se
