On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 10:55:43AM -0400, Joe Loiacono wrote:
> Actually RRDTool interpolates any late replys to the nearest specified
> collection timepoint (e.g., every 5th minute.) It doesn't really resample.
That particular document seems to refer to it as resampling, but yes,
interpolation
Matt
ZimmermanTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent La
Some long long long time ago I wrote a small tool called snmpstatd. Back
then Sprint management was gracious to allow me to release it as a
public-domain code.
It basically collects usage statistics (in 30-sec "peaks" and 5-min
averages), memory and CPU utilization from routers, by performi
It has a lot of similarities to old Audi's. Remember they used to work
fine and then for no reason used to fall in to drive, rev high, and run
over Grandma and the kids! Sounds a bit like their peering.:)
On Tue, 23
Jul 2002, Streiner, Justin wrote:
>
> On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Alex Rubenste
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
> Yes, it's horrid. I've been peering with PSI for going on three years, and
> it's never been as bad as it is now.
I took advantage of their "free peering" offer back in the day, and ended
up peering with them for about 18 months (06/1999 - 01/2001).
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
> I have a small RRD project box that polls 200 interfaces and has it
> takes 1 minute, 5 seconds to run with 60% cpu usage (so obviously it
> can be streamlined if I wanted to work on it). I guess the limit in this
> implementation is 1000 interface
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 09:53:41AM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote:
>
> There is a C library, librrd. That is how the other language APIs are
> built. As to efficiency, there is a lot of stringification, which is
> inconvenient and unnatural in C, but this should not be the bottleneck in
> the col
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 02:40:10AM -0400, Richard A Steenbergen wrote:
> While you're at it, eliminate the forking to the rrdtool bin when you're
> adding data. A little thought and profiling goes a long way, this is
> simple number crunching we're talking about, not supercomputer work. The
> pr
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 10:50:03PM -0700, Doug Clements wrote:
> I think the problem with using rrdtool for billing purposes as described
> is that data can (and does) get lost. If your poller is a few cycles late,
> the burstable bandwidth measured goes up when the poller catches up to the
> in
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 08:34:40AM +0200, Alexander Koch wrote:
> Phil,
>
> imagine some four routers dying or not answering queries,
> you will see the poll script give you timeout after timeout
> after timeout and with some 50 to 100 routers and the
> respective interfaces you see mrtg choke b
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 11:42:57PM -0700, Gary E. Miller wrote:
>
> Yo Alexander!
>
> On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Alexander Koch wrote:
>
> > imagine some four routers dying or not answering queries,
> > you will see the poll script give you timeout after timeout
> > after timeout and with some 50 to
Yo Alexander!
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Alexander Koch wrote:
> imagine some four routers dying or not answering queries,
> you will see the poll script give you timeout after timeout
> after timeout and with some 50 to 100 routers and the
> respective interfaces you see mrtg choke badly, losing dat
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 02:25:36AM -0400, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
> I have a small RRD project box that polls 200 interfaces and has it
> takes 1 minute, 5 seconds to run with 60% cpu usage (so obviously it
> can be streamlined if I wanted to work on it). I guess the limit in this
> implementation
On Tue, 23 July 2002 02:25:36 -0400, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
> I have a small RRD project box that polls 200 interfaces and has it
> takes 1 minute, 5 seconds to run with 60% cpu usage (so obviously it
> can be streamlined if I wanted to work on it). I guess the limit in this
> implementation is 1
OTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 2:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
- Original Message -
From: "Phil Rosenthal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
> I don't think RRD is that bad if yo
23, 2002 2:10 AM
To: Phil Rosenthal
Cc: 'Doug Clements'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 01:56:45AM -0400, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
>
> I don't think RRD is that bad if you are gonna check only every 5
> minutes...
RRD doesn't
- Original Message -
From: "Phil Rosenthal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
> I don't think RRD is that bad if you are gonna check only every 5
> minutes...
>
> Again, perhaps I'm just missing something, but so lets say
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 01:56:45AM -0400, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
>
> I don't think RRD is that bad if you are gonna check only every 5
> minutes...
RRD doesn't measure anything, it stores and graphs data. The perl pollers
everyone is using can barely keep up with 5 minute samples on a couple
doz
p intels running RRD -- assuming your
snmpd can deal with the load...
--Phil
-Original Message-
From: Doug Clements [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 1:50 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
- Original Message -
F
- Original Message -
From: "Phil Rosenthal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
> Call me crazy -- but what's wrong with setting up RRDtool with a
> heartbeat time of 30 seconds, and putting in cron:
> * * * * * rrdscript.sh ; sleep 3
M
To: Richard A Steenbergen
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
- Original Message -
From: "Richard A Steenbergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
> Personally I would like to see the data collection done on the router
> itse
- Original Message -
From: "Richard A Steenbergen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
> Personally I would like to see the data collection done on the router
> itself where it is simple to collect data very frequently, then pushed
> out. This
On Tue, Jul 23, 2002 at 12:04:34AM -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
>
> An effective way would to graph queue drops:
>
> Serial4/1/1 is up, line protocol is up
ifInDiscards = 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.13
ifOutDiscards = 1.3.6.1.2.1.2.2.1.19
A far more interesting thing to graph than temperature IMHO. :
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 08:38:58PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Is there patch or special config example available that would allow me
> to use mrtg (or rather rrdtool) to measure more often and then graph it
> in a way that would show standard 5-min graph but also separate line
> showing
) packet loss, but lower
quality of service anyway.
--Phil
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Alex Rubenstein
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 12:05 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
An
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Richard A Steenbergen
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 11:34:44PM -0400, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
> I'd rather have a noncongested gige public peer than a ds3 private
peer any day.
Except apparently that's called trolling ;)
--Phil
An effective way would to graph queue drops:
Serial4/1/1 is up, line protocol is up
Description: to PSI via 3x-xxx-xxx-
Internet address is 154.13.64.22/30
Last clearing of "show interface" counters 5w4d
Queueing strategy: fifo
Output queue 0/40, 2275 drops; input queue 0/75, 0 dr
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 08:38:58PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >
> Is there patch or special config example available that would allow me to
> use mrtg (or rather rrdtool) to measure more often and then graph it in a
> way that would show standard 5-min graph but also separate line showing
Packet loss is not guaranteed, especially considering the queuing
mechanism used is not disclosed.
IE, a simply hold queue north of 2048 will cause no loss, but the
occasional jitter/latency, most likely not even measureable by common
endpoints on the net.
I'm not endorsing, just correcting.
o misinterpretation.
cheers,
brian
:
:--Phil
:
:-Original Message-
:From: Brian Wallingford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
:Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 11:13 PM
:To: Phil Rosenthal
:Cc: 'Alex Rubenstein'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
:
:
:Good for you, Ph
Is there patch or special config example available that would allow me to
use mrtg (or rather rrdtool) to measure more often and then graph it in a
way that would show standard 5-min graph but also separate line showing
those micro burst and actual peak usage?
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Randy Bush
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 11:34:44PM -0400, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
>
> My point exactly -- I guess some people disagree...
> Probably with any sort of queuing there will only be minimal packet loss
> at 40mbit, but at any point one more stream can push it up to 43mbit,
> and then queuing might no l
-Original Message-
From: Randy Bush [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 11:31 PM
To: Phil Rosenthal
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
> 40mb/s isn't "loaded" for a DS3?
if you are measuring 40mb at five min intervals, micro peaks are
> 40mb/s isn't "loaded" for a DS3?
if you are measuring 40mb at five min intervals, micro peaks are pegged out
causing serious packet loss.
randy
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 11:13 PM
To: Phil Rosenthal
Cc: 'Alex Rubenstein'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
Good for you, Phil. Chime in again when you've got something useful to
offer.
In the meantime, you may want to review Economics 101 along with cert
July 22, 2002 10:02 PM
:To: Phil Rosenthal
:Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
:Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
:
:
:
:
:On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
:
:>
:> I call any upstream link 'over capacity' if either:
:> 1) There is less than 50mb/s unused
:
:That must work well for T
On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 10:01:36PM -0400, Alex Rubenstein wrote:
>
> So, what do you do? You monitor it's usage, making adjustments to make
> sure it doesn't get clobbered. You can easily run DS-3s at 35 to 40
> mbit/sec, with little to none increase in latency from the norm. Many
> people do th
ECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 10:02 PM
To: Phil Rosenthal
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
>
> I call any upstream link 'over capacity' if either:
> 1) There is less than 50mb/s unused
That must work well f
On Mon, 22 Jul 2002, Phil Rosenthal wrote:
>
> I call any upstream link 'over capacity' if either:
> 1) There is less than 50mb/s unused
That must work well for T1's and DS3's.
> 2) The circuit is more than 50% in use
I call it 'over capacity' too, but that doesn't mean all the ducks are i
Behalf Of
Brian
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 9:36 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'Alex Rubenstein'
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
bwahaha, 2 funnee. I gotta think most people would be thinking of
adding another ds3 at that point.
Bri
- Original Messa
le would be thinking of adding
> another ds3 at that point.
>
> Bri
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Phil Rosenthal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "'Alex Rubenstein'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
>
> 40mb/s isn't "loaded" for a DS3?
>
> --Phil
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
> Alex Rubenstein
> Sent: Monda
nt: Monday, July 22, 2002 6:05 PM
Subject: RE: PSINet/Cogent Latency
>
> 40mb/s isn't "loaded" for a DS3?
>
> --Phil
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
> Alex Rubenstein
> Sent: Monday, July 22
40mb/s isn't "loaded" for a DS3?
--Phil
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Alex Rubenstein
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 8:27 PM
To: Derek Samford
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PSINet/Cogent Latency
Yes, it'
Yes, it's horrid. I've been peering with PSI for going on three years, and
it's never been as bad as it is now.
oddly enough, we see 30+ msec across a DS3 to them, which isn't that
loaded (35 to 40 mb/s).
Then, behind whatever we peer with, we see over 400 msec, with 50% loss,
during business
There was some mail being tossed around earlier about Cogent
having latency. I'm actually seeing this on PSINet (Now owned by
Cogent.) Is anyone else still seeing the latency they were experiencing
earlier?
Derek
46 matches
Mail list logo
