[38299] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: 95th Percentile again (was RE: C&W Peering Problem?)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alex Rubenstein)
Sun Jun 3 00:36:38 2001
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 00:35:23 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
From: Alex Rubenstein <alex@nac.net>
To: "Richard A. Steenbergen" <ras@e-gerbil.net>
Cc: Joe Abley <jabley@automagic.org>,
Timothy Brown <tcb@ga.prestige.net>, <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0106022201370.29677-100000@overlord.e-gerbil.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.33.0106030034280.1596-100000@neon>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> "samples" to calculate 95th percentile, so a missed sample is equivilent
> to a 0 sample. A rate can be interpolated for the missing time, but it is
> pretty much guaranteed not to be accurate, and I'd suspect a case could be
> made against a provider who "makes up numbers" because of a failure in
> their billing system.
Or, just take the next sample and divide it by 10 minutes, rather than 5,
and count it as two samples in the 95th calculation.
