Re: [atlas] Anchors as target hosts for SLA
On 6/6/17 7:03 PM, Gert Doering wrote:
> Too simple. What if that anchor is down, or the anchor host network has
> a network bottleneck towards the transit provider you are using?
well, I selected two anchors placed in two different NAPs where all ISPs
in my scenario are present.
so, not a big concern if one anchor is down.
the other issue about possible bottlenecks is not applicable in that
context.
> So you need something that averages over multiple anchors - we used to
> do that via TTM ("if our TTM hosts can reach more than 80% of all other
> TTM hosts, we declare the Internet to be in good working condition" - note
> the "80%", because something is always down somewhere) but haven't come
> around to define & implement something based on ATLAS yet.
I like the idea and it should definitely be the way to go.
thank you
--
antonio
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[atlas] Anchors as target hosts for SLA
hi, do you think could be a good idea to use Ripe Atlas Anchors as target hosts for measuring respect of SLA terms of an Internet transit? SLA example This Internet transit should meet the following criteria: average round trip delay (echo request, echo reply) toward $NEAREST_ATLAS_ANCHOR should be less than 100ms on a 10k packets stream of pings; packet loss equal or less than 0.02% pros, cons, recommendations? thank you -- antonio
Re: [atlas] Friday's events on RIPE Atlas
On 9/23/15 9:01 AM, Randy Bush wrote: >> who is a power user? > > i don't think it is productive to go down this path randy, you read my mind -- antonio
Re: [atlas] Friday's events on RIPE Atlas
On 9/22/15 5:34 PM, Romeo Zwart wrote: > - We need to better communicate "best practices" to these power users so > they can use their extra allowances responsibly. hi, who is a power user? maybe an anchor host or an atlas sponsor? thank you -- antonio
