At 10:22 AM +0000 10/31/02, Nigel Taylor wrote: >Howard, > It would seem that there's something wrong with the links in >that I'm unable to access either of the drafts you noted. It's also quite >possible that I simply didn't click on the link hard enough :-) Oh, I >know...much like a recent Cox communications commercial, maybe I simply >reached the end of the Internet. :-> > >thanks >Nigel
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-conterm-03.txt There is something wrong with the second one. I'll have to check on Monday. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Howard C. Berkowitz" >To: >Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 1:14 AM >Subject: Re: Another Internet Draft of Interest [7:56560] > > >> "Nigel Taylor" All, >> > I just got through some of the presentations linked from the recent >> >nanog >> >meeting. The draft in question was presented by Henk Uijterwaal titled >> "New >> >Services from RIPE NCC. >> > >> >There is also this link on the nanog list to his latest draft. >> > >> >http://www.ripe.net/home/henk/draft-ietf-ippm-owmetric-as-01.txt >> > >> >I was just thinking about some of our current tools like ping, hping, and >> >traceroute which measures round trip delay vs one-way delay. RFC 2679 >> >discusses numerous reasons for calculating one-way delay, however would >> >tools >> >like ping and traceroute with the existence of ping6 and traceroute6 be >> >rfc2679 compliant. I've not done any research at this point but, would >> >operational tools in everyday use benefit from this new active >measurement? >> > >> >Here's a pretty good link that explains the concept for the "normal" >folks >> >like myself. >> >> There are several problems with using timestamped measurement in the >> router itself. Some of these may be reduced with IPv6, but, for >> others, external passive hardware or special router hardware seems >> necessary. See our BGP convergence drafts, >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bgpconv-03.txt and >> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bgpbas-00.txt >> >> First, routers may not give sufficient precision in measurement, >> because they rate-limit ICMP to protect against ICMP floods, or >> simply don't prioritize it highly. I mention IPv6 because >> authenticated source addresses may be used without fear of denial of >> service. >> >> Second, the router may or may not have the capacity to capture and >> store a statistically valid amount of data. NetFlow data export, for >> example, summarizes to a degree. If you could shoot debug to syslog, >> you'd have a much better chance as long as the router could keep up >> with it, using something like a SPAN port. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=56595&t=56560 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
