Beyond a pure percentage, you might want to account for the time it takes
you stay below a certain threshold. If you want to target a certain link to
keep your 95th percentile peaks below 70%, then first get an understanding
of your traffic growth and try to project when you will reach that number.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, at 12:31, Mark Tinka wrote:
> I'm confident everyone (even the cheapest CFO) knows the consequences of
> congesting a link and choosing not to upgrade it.
I think you're over-confident.
> It's great to monitor packet loss, latency, pps, e.t.c. But packet loss
> at 10% link u
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020, at 09:31, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as
> well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80% capacity?
> 90%? 95%?
Some reflections about link capacity:
At 90% and over, you should panic.
Between
This is probably a long shot, but are there any AT&T Wireless engineers here, &
one who wouldn't mind contacting me off-list? I may be misinterpreting what
I'm seeing, but I think you might have a small number of MMSC servers that are
down...
-- Nathan
Can anyone describe the scholarship process to me please? What does one need to
demonstrate to be eligible?
On Mon, 10 Aug 2020 12:08:53 -0700
NANOG News wrote:
> *Join us online for NANOG 80*
> Share and discover the latest networking technologies and best practices
> with the greater NANOG co
This is an automated weekly mailing describing the state of the Internet
Routing Table as seen from APNIC's router in Japan.
The posting is sent to APOPS, NANOG, AfNOG, SANOG, PacNOG, SAFNOG
TZNOG, MENOG, BJNOG, SDNOG, CMNOG, LACNOG and the RIPE Routing WG.
Daily listings are sent to bgp-st...@li
6 matches
Mail list logo
