 |
 |
Depends on how you look at it. More sampling shows more extremes. If you sample at 1 minute, and it were to shoot up to 12G for a minute or two, and then drop below 1G for a minute or two, you would see both the 12G high, and the 1G low. If you look at the same traffic on a five min sample rate, you would see it at about 6G, and you would not see the 1G low, or the 12G high. Personally I like higher sample rates since if you are sizing a connection to the exchange, and you do not want to have any loss, in the above example you would have loss if you only purchased a 10G circuit, and if you were looking only at 5 minute sample rates, you would have no clue why you were getting intermittent packet loss. -----Original Message----- From: MICE Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hannigan, Martin Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2015 12:24 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] SNMP Measurements for MICE? Doesn't more sampling make it appear as if there is more traffic? The de facto std for IXPs is 5m polling. > On Aug 12, 2015, at 12:48, Anton Kapela <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > a secant line is a secant line, be it a ray/segment/line/etc between > points spaced 1 second, ten seconds, or ten minutes apart, no? > > (sorting line segments by their n-tile magnitude, be it at 95% or some > other interval, seems decoupled from the measurement/secant interval) > > if my graph theory is bad, let me know :) > > -Tk > >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Hannigan, Martin <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> >> All, >> >> Isn’t 95th @ 1m unusual and non-standard? >> >> http://micelg.usinternet.com/export/graph_385.html >> >> Best, >> >> -M< >> >> >> >> >>