[32572] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Traceroute versus other performance measurement
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Wed Nov 29 11:22:20 2000
Message-Id: <200011291617.eATGHMG22452@black-ice.cc.vt.edu>
To: Paul Bradford <paul@adelphia.net>
Cc: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:07:59 EST."
<00112910161602.26452@merlin.noc.adelphia.net>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="==_Exmh_-1459378188P";
micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:17:22 -0500
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
--==_Exmh_-1459378188P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000 10:07:59 EST, Paul Bradford <paul@adelphia.net> said:
> I need help with a reality/sanity check. Traceroute is a good tool for
> checking for routing type problems (loops). Does anyone feel it's a good tool
> to use for testing "bandwidth".... My obvious answer is it isn't a good tool
Well, if you're looking at the numbers, and hops 1 to 12 are each adding
3-5ms to the RTT, and between 12 and 13 you get a hit for 400ms+, that tends
to indicate a *possible* problem (or a satellite link ;)
I'd not trust it any further than that, however...
--
Valdis Kletnieks
Operating Systems Analyst
Virginia Tech
--==_Exmh_-1459378188P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8
Comment: Exmh version 2.2 06/16/2000
iQA/AwUBOiUsEXAt5Vm009ewEQLcjwCgyJiXpx1vglu05Sgby8JeLdECTzMAoIU6
Bad1om0NdNlNAXJ6Ax+rLgpx
=91OQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_-1459378188P--
