Greetings all,
Looking for a good test set. Primary use will be testing L2 circuits
(It'll technically be VPLS, But the test set will just see L2). Being able
to test routed L3 would also be useful. Most of the sets I've seen are two
sided, A "reflector" at the remote side, And the test set
] On Behalf Of
Nick Olsen
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 10:23 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RFC2544 Testing Equipment
Greetings all,
Looking for a good test set. Primary use will be testing L2 circuits (It'll
technically be VPLS, But the test set will just see L2). Being able to test
r
t; reporting out of them. They had RJ45 and SFP on them.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: NANOG [mailto:nanog-bounces+james=arenalgroup...@nanog.org] On
> Behalf Of Nick Olsen
> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 10:23 AM
> To: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: RFC2544 Testing Equipmen
JDSU make some nice ones that we use to qualify cell tower back haul. Not
cheap though
-Original Message-
From: "Jeremy Austin"
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 11:29am
To: "James Breeden" , "n...@flhsi.com" ,
"nanog@nanog.org"
Subject: Re: R
On 30 May 2017 at 16:22, Nick Olsen wrote:
> Greetings all,
>
> Looking for a good test set. Primary use will be testing L2 circuits
> (It'll technically be VPLS, But the test set will just see L2). Being able
> to test routed L3 would also be useful. Most of the sets I've seen are two
> sided,
Cool. Seems you're using AF_PACKET, which makes it actually unique.
iperf/netperf etc use UDP or TCP socket, so UDP performance is just
abysmal, you can't saturate 1GE link with any reliability. So
measuring for example packet loss is not possible at all.
I've been meaning to write AF_PACKET based
On 31 May 2017 at 11:56, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Cool. Seems you're using AF_PACKET, which makes it actually unique.
> iperf/netperf etc use UDP or TCP socket, so UDP performance is just
> abysmal, you can't saturate 1GE link with any reliability. So
> measuring for example packet loss is not possible
On 30/05/17 16:22, Nick Olsen wrote:
> Looking to test up to 1Gb/s at various packet sizes, Measure Packet loss,
> Jitter..etc. Primarily Copper, But if it had some form of optical port, I
> wouldn't complain. Outputting a report that we can provide to the customer
> would be useful, But isn't
We used VeEX for a while and had our CO Techs run around with hand-held VeEx
testers and run tests from them to a VeEx loopback device I config'd mpls
pw's between them. We don't really do this anymore... we now role out Accedian
MetroNid's and MetroNode's which have a lot of this RFC2544 a
On 30 May 2017 at 16:41, James Harrison wrote:
> On 30/05/17 16:22, Nick Olsen wrote:
>> Looking to test up to 1Gb/s at various packet sizes, Measure Packet loss,
>> Jitter..etc. Primarily Copper, But if it had some form of optical port, I
>> wouldn't complain. Outputting a report that we can pro
o: nanog@nanog.org
> Subject: [SPF] RFC2544 Testing Equipment
>
> Greetings all,
>
> Looking for a good test set. Primary use will be testing L2 circuits
> (It'll technically be VPLS, But the test set will just see L2). Being
> able to test routed L3 would also be useful. M
11 matches
Mail list logo
