This archive is retained to ensure existing URLs remain functional. It will not contain any emails sent to this mailing list after July 1, 2024. For all messages, including those sent before and after this date, please visit the new location of the archive at https://mailman.ripe.net/archives/list/[email protected]/
[atlas] probe resolution, overhead, or ...?
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] probe resolution, overhead, or ...?
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] probe resolution, overhead, or ...?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Randy Bush
randy at psg.com
Wed Jun 20 13:01:09 CEST 2012
> My conclusion is: probes are just very slow. yes, it seems they are a bit slow. now that we know, we can calibrate our experiments to account for that. > They are fine for measuring multi millisecond delays on WAN links but > not for sub-millisecond delays on local links. some experiments care about jitter. we are seeing variance noticeably greater than bsd boxen. @stelios: yes icmp goes the slow path. but atlas has a very constrained measurment model, and it seems to be pretty much based on icmp. randy
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] probe resolution, overhead, or ...?
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] probe resolution, overhead, or ...?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]