[3953] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Agenda for next NANOG
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Havard.Eidnes@runit.sintef.no)
Fri Aug 30 16:48:58 1996
To: vaf@WR.BBNPLANET.COM
Cc: randy@psg.com, srh@merit.edu, nanog@merit.edu
From: Havard.Eidnes@runit.sintef.no
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 30 Aug 96 12:51:30 PDT"
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 22:33:15 +0200
Hi,
it's possible that I'm off base here, but...
> How about
>
> Analysis of Actual End to End Performance accross the NAPs/MAEs
>
> To be given by each operator?
>
> An excellent topic, to be sure, but how do you propose that
> this be measured?
>
> About the only thing NAP operators can directly gather and
> report upon is the "ten feet of level-2 wire".
Somehow I think Randy meant "connected network service operator"
rather than "NAP operator" when he said "operator". Isn't the
problem in some cases more with overloaded access circuits *into*
the NAP rather than the NAP interconnect medium itself?
How to measure? Well, I must admit that I do not have much of a
suggestion there. Pinging your own NAP router usually will not
reveal much regarding the quality of service delivered over the
access circuit, as the NAP router can fool around with where it
places it's self-originating packets in the output queue on the
access circuit.
- Havard
