North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!
On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, Mike Hedlund wrote: > Personally, i dont think checking the network path to www.'NSP'.net is the > correct way to do it. To me, tracing the path from multiple locations TO Exactly. Take SprintLink as an example. www.sprintlink.net and www.sprint.com are the same box [martha.commerce.com (220.127.116.11)], but that sits off some T1 somewhere. www.sprint.net (aka ftp.sprintlink.net) seems to be in a better position network-wise to determine real network performance. It's highly unlikely that I'll burn an FE port to stick a web server up -- it's more likely that I'll put the www machine on a shared 10M segment with other corporate machines. Also, not everyone will use the fastest machine in the world as their web server -- expecially for the company (corporate) machine. > www.'NSPs-Customer'.com is better.. altho that doesnt take into account > 'peak' times, anomolies, freakish events, position of the moon.. etc.. Hopefully these would be global effects that would show up in everyone's data - since KeyNote apparently performed the tests from "from 27 major metropolitan areas in the United States". Oh, does that say 'United States'? No wonder Bell Canada got screwed. > However, i do find stats kind of entertaining to interpret, i dont think > there is a way to set in stone that by doing X you can find a 'perfect' > value that represents the statistics from A to B. It sounds like their metric was strictly a 'download time' mertic - maybe they also took into account the time to connect() - but either way they are depending on one machine to judge an entire network -- which is a highly flawed metric. Also, what if it takes 3 GET's to download 50k on one server, and on another it takes 20 GET's? That is a *huge* difference in overhead for the server. I wonder how much they thought about their measuring methods before they decided to implement them. So how *do* you "correctly" measure a provider's bandwidth and performance? Well, I don't think there is any simple answer to that question -- if one at all -- as Mike points out :-) I'd like to see Keynote publish some details on how, exactly, they performed the tests - and exactly what tests they performed. -Taner -- D. Taner Halicioglu firstname.lastname@example.org Programmer/Engineer/Sysadmin ISI / GlobalCenter Voice: +1 408 543 0313 Fax: +1 408 541 9878 PGP Fingerprint: 65 0D 03 A8 26 21 6D B8 23 3A D6 67 23 6E C0 36