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] Atlas probe - virtual appliance?
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] Atlas probe - virtual appliance?
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] Atlas probe - virtual appliance?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Iñigo Ortiz de Urbina
inigo at infornografia.net
Wed Jun 19 13:34:31 CEST 2013
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Randy Bush <randy at psg.com> wrote: > > > Virtual firewalls work great with VMware and cost effective as well, > > 90% cost saving > >> But virtual appliances are generally pretty bad at network monitoring. > > nigel meant time-dependent measurements > Allow me to share some interesting links with Daniel Suchy (and the list archive) regarding the virtualization impact on CPU, disk I/O and time accuracy: o Short article published at labs.ripe.net [1] not long ago around the Atlas Anchors. o Talk by Randy himself [2][3] on probe/measurement calibration Regards, [1] https://labs.ripe.net/Members/romeo_zwart/ripe-atlas-anchor-to-ripe-ncc-service-node [2] https://ripe66.ripe.net/presentations/128-130513.tokyo-ping.pdf [3] https://ripe66.ripe.net/archives/video/12/
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] Atlas probe - virtual appliance?
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] Atlas probe - virtual appliance?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]