[165658] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: common method to count traffic volume on IX
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Niels Bakker)
Tue Sep 17 16:15:56 2013
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2013 22:15:23 +0200
From: Niels Bakker <niels=nanog@bakker.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Mail-Followup-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <20130917185152.GA66624@ussenterprise.ufp.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
>In a message written on Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 07:11:23PM +0300, Martin T wrote:
>>counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't
>>it? I mean if "input bytes" and "output bytes" on all the ports
>>facing the IX members are already counted, then counting traffic
>>on links between the switches in fabric will count some of the
>>traffic multiple times.
I don't know of any IXP that does this. Industry standard is as
you and others wrote before: the 5-minute counter difference on all
customer-facing ports, publishing both input and output bps and pps.
I guess MRTG is to 'blame' for these values more than anything.
* bicknell@ufp.org (Leo Bicknell) [Tue 17 Sep 2013, 20:52 CEST]:
>Sounds like a marketing opportunity.
>
>customer--s1--s2--s3--s4--s5--s6--s7--s8--s9--s10--customer
>
>Presto, highest volume IX!
Highest latency too, and here's to hoping all those devices actually
work - it'll sure be an interesting exercise to find out wat switch in
the path dropped a frame - you might as well just multiply your stats
to get the same effect
-- Niels.
