[34879] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Network for Sale
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Paul A Vixie)
Wed Feb 21 15:34:42 2001
Message-Id: <200102212028.MAA50344@redpaul.mfnx.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: Message from Philippe Strauss <philou@safe-host.net>
of "Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:57:43 +0100." <20010221125743.A2444@safe-host.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 12:28:20 -0800
From: Paul A Vixie <vixie@mfnx.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
>> Oh god, I hope not. RTT has never been an accurate predictor of end-to-end
>> performance. (Just ask anyone who bought into ping-based global server load
>> balancing.) ASPATH length is almost as bad (as a predictor) as RTT.
>
> well, it's the way icmp_echo is handeld in some vendor routers and
> sometime also the poor implementation of an IP stack on the echoing
> device which is a problem.
no, that is not the problem. oh i admit that ping time jitter is ~random.
but even if it weren't, RTT doesn't drive performance, (bw*delay)-loss does.
