[189425] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network traffic simulator
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Saku Ytti)
Wed May 25 03:14:08 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <CAAeewD_9WL5wNDH097zNrm2adPP+i2ZGWGktUAiUvcKf-azA0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 10:14:05 +0300
From: Saku Ytti <saku@ytti.fi>
To: Spencer Ryan <sryan@arbor.net>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>, Mitchell Lewis <mitchell@dash-networks.com>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Ugh. In all cases below, where it says Agilent it should say IXIA.
> Many times in QoS testing you'd have EF, AF, BE
> traffic, and you have expectation how many percentage in given
> situation should given class drop, doing this in Agilent is a chore.
>
> Agilent probably has best in the breed network with emulation
> capabilities. And focus generally seems to be in protocol
> testing/development where network emulation is tremendously useful.
>
> As the platforms are very expensive, not many SPs are using them, so
> they're not getting input from SPs what the boxes should be doing.
> This market is very poorly tapped, there is large demand in the market
> for proper testing equipment but it's just priced out of reach. I
> believe Spirent and Agilent should sell the hardware at-cost, then
> sell timed licenses, where maybe 1000h license would be today's full
> cost. Large segment of this market might not use box at all in some
> year and would generally only require modest hours from it.
> Bit harder to justify the cost with low use, compared to vendors who
> run them automated 24/7.
--
++ytti
