 |
 |
Sure, but why does that matter with respect to the IXP fabric? It’s misleading to some extent, along the lines you’ve explained. The idea behind IXP statistics is about volume. Networks typically use it as a gauge of value and especially when there are two IXPs competing in a market. The 5m sampling benchmark is also not a de-facto standard, it’s a fully fledged standard. It is nice that the graph is clear about the sample rate though so not a complaint, pointing out an oddity as contrasted to 99% of the IXP world. There’s really no need for the MICE to be doing 1m IMHO. Best, -M< > On Aug 12, 2015, at 1:47 PM, Jeremy Lumby <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > 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< >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>