On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 11:38:37AM +0300, Saku Ytti wrote:
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7644490752/h49306FE3/
many complain that they've not seen emails from nanog in few days (since
5th day of 'The Cidr Report')
Test win condition not specified.
-J
On 7/9/2013 1:38 AM, Saku Ytti wrote:
https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/7644490752/h49306FE3/
many complain that they've not seen emails from nanog in few days (since
5th day of 'The Cidr Report')
Next time? Please consider just examining the archives, so that you may
verify that indeed, a miracle
On (2013-07-09 05:31 -0700), Shrdlu wrote:
Next time? Please consider just examining the archives, so that you may
verify that indeed, a miracle has occurred, and that indeed, no one has
anything in particular to say. I admit that I checked the archives
myself, when it seemed to quiet.
I'm
[mailto:mike-na...@tiedyenetworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 4:08 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
snip
These speedtests are pure unscientific bs and I'd love to see them
called out on the carpet for it.
Mike-
On 04/03/2013 02:48 PM, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:07:48 -0700, Mike said:
These speedtests are pure unscientific bs and I'd love to see them
called out on the carpet for it.
As far as I know, it's possible for the end-to-end reported values to be
lower than your
When is speed ever ensured past someone else's edge/border ?
You may pass through your upstream that fast but once you are out in the open
range you are free game to all the lions, tigers bears..,
There is always going to be something eating you. Best off letting it be the
Spanish queasiness
It'd be nice to know if NDT was not accurate as well. Anyone tested it?
We've been using it for a few years. On my laptop that runs linux I get
fairly consistent results (around 935Mb/s up and down right now) over a
1Gig routed link (a couple routers and a firewall in between.) On the
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 06:18:34 +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson said:
I have pitched the idea in the IETF to have TCP stacks themselves report
IP performance indicators (aggregate) and that a standard for this to be
standardised. No takers so far.
RFC4989 TCP Extended Statistics MIB. M. Mathis, J.
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
RFC4989 TCP Extended Statistics MIB. M. Mathis, J. Heffner, R.
Raghunarayan. May 2007. (Format: TXT=153768 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED
STANDARD)
Looks like a taker to me. Also, see the work the Web10G group is doing for
Linux:
The MT speed test is a multi-connection test, think 20 streams or connections
at once.Most web based tests are single stream. Now you get into 802.11N
speedtests where they are optimized for many connections MIMO operations,
hence, a single connection don't show good results, where a MT
On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:29:40 +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson said:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
RFC4989 TCP Extended Statistics MIB. M. Mathis, J. Heffner, R.
Raghunarayan. May 2007. (Format: TXT=153768 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED
STANDARD)
Looks like a taker to
[Plug alert]
For longer term monitoring, Project BISmark provides an easy-to-use
system. It's an open source, customizable OpenWRT-based home router that
runs periodic network measurements (latency, throughput, packetloss,
jitter, etc) to nearby MLab servers.
It uses netperf (single and multiple
will have the
best results as well.
The speedtest.net mini version is free. Same test methodology and brand
recognition for the customers to be satisfied. Paid version if you need
branding or whatever.
~Seth
These speedtests are pure unscientific bs and I'd love to see them
called out
On Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:07:48 -0700, Mike said:
These speedtests are pure unscientific bs and I'd love to see them
called out on the carpet for it.
As far as I know, it's possible for the end-to-end reported values to be
lower than your immediate upstream due to issues further upstream.
But if
We host one of the gazillion speed test sites and for networks that are
close to us we find it reasonably accurate .. a good benchmark at least ..
Even our installers in the field use it as a reference point YMMV
obviously
Paul
-Original Message-
From: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
connections by using too small file
sizes. If
you use curl on the speedtest random.jpg files and grab the 4000x4000.jpg it'll
give a
more representive test of download speed.
Ben.
On 3 Apr 2013, at 22:48, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
(If anybody's got evidence of it reporting more than the link is technically
capable of, feel free to correct me...)
I've seen speedtest.net give results significantly greater than the physical bw
of the client's network link.
Nick
Mikrotik bandwidth test
On 3 Apr 2013, at 22:48, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
(If anybody's got evidence of it reporting more than the link is technically
capable of, feel free to correct me...)
I've seen speedtest.net give results significantly greater than the physical bw
of the client's
From: Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org
Date: 04/03/2013 3:04 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
On 3 Apr 2013, at 22:48, valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
(If anybody's got evidence
...@foobar.org
Date: 04/03/2013 3:35 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Warren Bailey wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com
Cc: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu,nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
On 3 Apr 2013, at 23:20, Warren Bailey
wbai
)
To: Warren Bailey wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com
Cc: valdis.kletni...@vt.edu,nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
On 3 Apr 2013, at 23:20, Warren Bailey
wbai...@satelliteintelligencegroup.com wrote:
Try it with upwards of 900ms
I can run two speedtest.net session side by side on my home network on one
laptop, and over VPN to my employer's Long Island locale on a second,
pointed at the same speedtest server, over the same wifi and ADSL and have
the VPN connection report speeds that are (a) 50% better on VPN than not;
and,
--- n...@foobar.org wrote:
From: Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org
They may do some magic with bandwidth delay products.. If that was the case,
they may have written it for a standard latency versus something that is
unreasonable by interweb standards.
I don't know how they calculate
On 4/3/13 2:52 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
We host one of the gazillion speed test sites and for networks that are
close to us we find it reasonably accurate .. a good benchmark at least ..
The speedtest.net that's hosted on one of my directly connected transits
is consistently wrong, which
(a) may be valid.
(b) is fishy
(a) may be valid because it may be that your ISP has a better set of peering
relationships towards your VPN server and your company's ISP has better
peering relationships towards the Speedtest server than your ISP has
towards the Speedtest server.
I'm not saying
Original message
From: Seth Mattinen se...@rollernet.us
Date: 04/03/2013 6:13 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
On 4/3/13 2:52 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
We host one of the gazillion speed test sites and for networks
On 4/3/13 6:25 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
I'm shocked Ookla hasn't been eaten by some major ISP. Speed tests are
the root of most complaints. Your link is congested (oversubed) and you
then attempt to completely saturate your bandwidth to tell your provider
what a suck job they are doing. I
...@rollernet.us
Date: 04/03/2013 6:36 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
On 4/3/13 6:25 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
I'm shocked Ookla hasn't been eaten by some major ISP. Speed tests are
the root of most complaints. Your link
...@rollernet.us
Date: 04/03/2013 6:13 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
On 4/3/13 2:52 PM, Paul Stewart wrote:
We host one of the gazillion speed test sites and for networks that are
close to us we find it reasonably accurate .. a good
On 4/3/13 3:20 PM, Warren Bailey wrote:
Try it with upwards of 900ms of variable latency.
on linux
tc qdisc add dev eth0 root netem delay 900ms 150msdistribution normal
and then you can slowly test the internet to your hearts content.
Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device
Original
stacks themselves report
IP performance indicators (aggregate) and that a standard for this to be
standardised. No takers so far.
I hate test traffic, I want to know how the real traffic is doing instead.
In my opinion, people are way too happy to inject a lot of useless test
traffic.
--
Mikael
valid
results... I mean obviously it's not showing their link speed, it is
showing the characteristics of their connectivity to our speed test server.
We use a couple of threads on the download test and if I take results,
divide by number of threads, look at the connection characteristics and do
The only reliable way to really test performance is to saturate the
pipe (Iperf) and have a sufficiently well provisioned target. NDT does
a good job using short non-saturation tests, but it is susceptible to
slow start and other challenges. In general, NDT results will be more
conservative than
was.
Thanks again!
Lorell
-Original Message-
From: Justin M. Streiner [mailto:strei...@cluebyfour.org]
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2013 7:27 PM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
I am having some
vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
Thanks for the many helpful suggestions I received offline.
One thing that I was able to deduce was that one of the radios along the
path had Ethernet auto negotiate turned on. I turned it off and the TCP
speeds went way up. It seems that UDP was not affected
You might want to consider putting up a speedtest server internal to your
network. I know there is a fee but well worth it I believe. You will
I would consider NDT as well: www.internet2.edu/performance/ndt
Last I checked, about 3 years ago,
The speedtest.net site has a free mini edition
(http://www.speedtest.net/mini.php) you can download and extract to
some http available path (asp, php, jsp all supported). It's a flash
applet, easy to wrap into your own page. Transfers one of ten large
JPG files of random noise (largest is 31MB).
.
The speedtest.net mini version is free. Same test methodology and brand
recognition for the customers to be satisfied. Paid version if you need
branding or whatever.
~Seth
speeds. They are using speedtest.net and/or speakeasy.net to test
the results.
My network is Mikrotik based and as such, I have access to Mikrotik's
built-in bandwidth testing.
With a laptop on site, running against speedtest.net (which kicked me over
to the Comcast speedtest server instance) I
On Mon, 1 Apr 2013, Lorell Hathcock wrote:
I am having some speedtest results that are difficult to interpret.
Some of my customers have begun complaining that they are not getting the
proper speeds. They are using speedtest.net and/or speakeasy.net to test
the results.
Take the speedtest
If this gets delivered please delete me. Somehow I seem to have MX requests
for nanog.org failing ...
---
() ascii ribbon campaign against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org
Hi Micah,
From: micah anderson [mailto:mi...@riseup.net]
Thanks for the suggestion. Do you know what their bandwidth is? I can
easily pull a .iso or similar from there to do some tests.
There's some info at http://mirror.aarnet.edu.au/indexabout.html - it's
connected at 10Gbps.
or
less). But I dont think 30 second iperf tests are particularly revealing
when the bandwith rate might change drastically over the day. I
considered doing a 3 day iperf test, but somehow this seems not how the
tool was designed.
Someone suggested I find test files from various Asian locations
Linode hosts one to test their Tokyo location -
http://speedtest.tokyo.linode.com/100MB-tokyo.bin
Source - http://www.linode.com/speedtest/
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 1:59 PM, Micah Anderson mi...@riseup.net wrote:
Hi,
I'm sitting on what is advertised as a 100mbit/sec connection in
Cambodia. I
a number of network locations, and at one point I
did get 71mbit/sec (most of the results were around 20-25mbit/sec or
less). But I dont think 30 second iperf tests are particularly revealing
when the bandwith rate might change drastically over the day. I
considered doing a 3 day iperf test
are particularly revealing
when the bandwith rate might change drastically over the day. I
considered doing a 3 day iperf test, but somehow this seems not how the
tool was designed.
Someone suggested I find test files from various Asian locations to
download via wget. I found a bunch of 100mb test
Hi Micah,
You could try mirror.aarnet.edu.au, if Australia is sufficiently Asian for
you...
David
-Original Message-
From: Micah Anderson [mailto:mi...@riseup.net]
Sent: Friday, 3 August 2012 4:00
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Wanted: Asia bandwidth test files
Hi,
I'm sitting
Hi Micah
Does anyone have any machines in Japan, S. Korea, or other asian
locations with good bandwidth. where they can host a 100mbit file so I can
attempt to download it to test this?
you may try downloading from stingray.cyber.net.pk
It's in Karachi (Pakistan) with GigE limits. Use rsync
I can
attempt to download it to test this?
you may try downloading from stingray.cyber.net.pk
It's in Karachi (Pakistan) with GigE limits. Use rsync.
Regards,
Aftab A. Siddiqui.
--
Regards,
Aftab A. Siddiqui
--
Regards,
Jason Leschnik.
[m] 0432 35 4224
[w@] jason dot leschnik
Howdy all,
I'm a Security Manager of a large network, we are conducting a Pentest next
month and the testers are demanding a complete network diagram of the entire
network. We don't have a complete network diagram that shows everything and
everywhere we are. At most we have a bunch of
didn't know existed?
What do you all do with your large networks? One huge network diagram, a
bunch of network diagrams separated by region, or both? Any pentest horror
stories?
Thanks,
Tim
Any penetration test should only require your networks and masks. As
far as a diagram
On Tue, 5 Jun 2012, Green, Timothy wrote:
I'm a Security Manager of a large network, we are conducting a Pentest
next month and the testers are demanding a complete network diagram of
the entire network. We don't have a complete network diagram that
shows everything and everywhere we are.
A complete diagram makes their life easier, may make for a more
complete test, but they are working for you, so if you don't have it,
you don't have. I'm not a big fan of having a single diagram with
everything laid out anyway, but I'm from the old shcool.
-jim
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:52 AM
On 6/5/12 07:52 , Green, Timothy wrote:
Howdy all,
I'm a Security Manager of a large network, we are conducting a
Pentest next month and the testers are demanding a complete network
diagram of the entire network. We don't have a complete network
diagram that shows everything and everywhere
It's not much of a penetration test, imho, if the attackers have detailed
knowledge of your network and systems before the attack. You should
determine what kind of a scenario you are trying to simulate, and how the
results will be used to improve security. Is this a black box situation,
where
Railroad Corporation (AMTRAK)
10 G Street, NE Office 6E606
Washington, DC 20002
bakl...@amtrak.com
-Original Message-
From: Green, Timothy [mailto:timothy.gr...@mantech.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 10:53 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Penetration Test Assistance
Howdy all,
I'm
give them access to stuff that I didn't know existed?
What do you all do with your large networks? One huge network diagram, a bunch
of network diagrams separated by region, or both? Any pentest horror stories?
Thanks,
Tim
Any penetration test should only require your networks and masks
On 6/5/12, Green, Timothy timothy.gr...@mantech.com wrote:
I'm a Security Manager of a large network, we are conducting a Pentest next
month and the testers are demanding a complete network diagram of the entire
network. We don't have a complete network diagram that shows everything
and
On 5 June 2012 15:52, Green, Timothy timothy.gr...@mantech.com wrote:
Howdy all,
I'm a Security Manager of a large network, we are conducting a Pentest
next month and the testers are demanding a complete network diagram of the
entire network.
I'd treat this as the first of their pen tests
On Jun 5, 2012, at 12:52 PM, Peter Kristolaitis alte...@alter3d.ca wrote:
In general, my experience with most pen testers is a severe disappointment,
and isn't anything that couldn't be done in-house by taking the person in
your department who has the most ingrained hacker/geek personality,
Hi Tim,
A _good_ pen test team would not need a network diagram. Their first round of
penetration test would have them build their own network diagram from their
analysis of your network.
Barry
On Jun 5, 2012, at 7:52 AM, Green, Timothy wrote:
Howdy all,
I'm a Security Manager
Seriously.
--p
-Original Message-
From: Aled Morris [mailto:al...@qix.co.uk]
I'd treat this as the first of their pen tests - a social engineering
attack to obtain secret information about the network, and refuse.
Aled
I'm with Barry--a network diagram showing everything from the pov of the pen
team should be part of the end report.
--p
-Original Message-
From: Barry Greene [mailto:bgre...@senki.org]
Hi Tim,
A _good_ pen test team would not need a network diagram. Their first round of
penetration
...@senki.org]
Hi Tim,
A _good_ pen test team would not need a network diagram. Their first round of
penetration test would have them build their own network diagram from their
analysis of your network.
Barry
looked at it, it was just a color depth issue in X that took about 45 seconds
from why is this broken? to hey look, I fixed it!.
- Completely missed the honeypot machine I set up for the test. I had
logs from the machine showing that his scanning had hit the machine and had
found several
allocation that is in scope unless it is a more forced test and not a
general external test.
On 5 June 2012 20:48, Brett Watson br...@the-watsons.org wrote:
On Jun 5, 2012, at 9:52 AM, Peter Kristolaitis wrote:
As far as horror stories... yeah. My most memorable experience was a guy
Backtrack CD to work properly. When I looked at it, it was
just a color depth issue in X that took about 45 seconds from why is this broken? to hey
look, I fixed it!.
- Completely missed the honeypot machine I set up for the test. I had logs
from the machine showing that his scanning had hit
On Jun 5, 2012, at 11:34 AM, Darden, Patrick S. wrote:
I'm with Barry--a network diagram showing everything from the pov of the pen
team should be part of the end report.
Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on the scope of the engagement. I've had
customers ask for very specific pen test
and low attacks.
Best of Luck,
Dennis
--
From: Baklarz, Ron bakl...@amtrak.com
Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2012 12:41 PM
To: Green, Timothy timothy.gr...@mantech.com
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: RE: Penetration Test Assistance
Not discounting the need
I know a lot of people are using / pointing to test-ipv6.com . The hardware
picked a bad week to quit sniffing glue.
Ill be working on trying to get it back up today, I need to source hardware.
Also looking at borrowing a VM for short term.
(speaking only for @test-ipv6.com
On 4 Jun 2012, at 06:50, Jason Fesler jfes...@yahoo-inc.com wrote:
I know a lot of people are using / pointing to test-ipv6.com . The hardware
picked a bad week to quit sniffing glue.
You got a bunch of mirrors for it right? Should not be to tricky to get someone
to let their act
On Jun 4, 2012, at 7:09 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
You got a bunch of mirrors for it right? Should not be to tricky to get
someone to let their act as the real thing for a bit.
I've got redirects up now to spread the load across VMs. For the next couple
of days, I don't expect a single VM
On 2012-06-04 08:13, Jason Fesler wrote:
On Jun 4, 2012, at 7:09 AM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
You got a bunch of mirrors for it right? Should not be to tricky to
get someone to let their act as the real thing for a bit.
I've got redirects up now to spread the load across VMs. For the
next
What's really needed is a service that looks up a given web page
over IPv6 from behind a 1280 byte MTU link and reports if all the
elements load or not. It dumps a list of elements with success/fail.
This would be useful to send the idiots that block ICMPv6 PTB yet
send packets bigger than
Much of that can be found here: http://www.wand.net.nz/pmtud/
Frank
-Original Message-
From: Mark Andrews [mailto:ma...@isc.org]
Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 6:54 PM
To: Jeroen Massar
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: test-ipv6.com / omgipv6day.com down
What's really needed is a service
http://ipv6chicken.net
Owen
On Jun 4, 2012, at 4:54 PM, Mark Andrews wrote:
What's really needed is a service that looks up a given web page
over IPv6 from behind a 1280 byte MTU link and reports if all the
elements load or not. It dumps a list of elements with success/fail.
This
On 2012-06-04 16:58, Owen DeLong wrote:
http://ipv6chicken.net
$ dig -t any ipv6chicken.net
; DiG 9.8.1-P1 -t any ipv6chicken.net
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 16935
The chicken cannot cross the road as the chicken does not exist.
In message c8343920-c2bc-4e2d-bd1f-df1268486...@delong.com, Owen DeLong
writes:
http://ipv6chicken.net
Owen
doesn't exist.
; DiG 9.9.1 ipv6chicken.net
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 5059
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0,
's/net/com'
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Mark Andrews ma...@isc.org wrote:
In message c8343920-c2bc-4e2d-bd1f-df1268486...@delong.com, Owen DeLong
writes:
http://ipv6chicken.net
Owen
doesn't exist.
; DiG 9.9.1 ipv6chicken.net
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; -HEADER-
My bad... It's .com not .net.
http://www.ipv6chicken.com
Owen
On Jun 4, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Jeroen Massar wrote:
On 2012-06-04 16:58, Owen DeLong wrote:
http://ipv6chicken.net
$ dig -t any ipv6chicken.net
; DiG 9.8.1-P1 -t any ipv6chicken.net
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
http://ipv6chicken.com/ tests the path to me. It doesn't check the
path back to the sites I want to reach though it does provide a
independent third party if there is complainst that PTB's are not
being generated. It would be useful if it reported the MTU that
was eventually used. Most OS's
What's really needed is a service that looks up a given web page
over IPv6 from behind a 1280 byte MTU link and reports if all the
elements load or not. It dumps a list of elements with success/fail.
This would be useful to send the idiots that block ICMPv6 PTB yet
send packets bigger than
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Livingood, Jason
jason_living...@cable.comcast.com wrote:
If you want to understand the issue in detail, check out the report from
MIT this year, written by Steve Bauer and available at
http://mitas.csail.mit.edu/papers/Bauer_Clark_Lehr_Broadband_Speed_Measurem
We host an Ookla Speedtest server onsite and find it a very reliable means
to identify throughput issues. The source of any performance issues may or
may not be ours, but if a customer says things are slow we can usually
identify whether it's their PC or network (browsing is slow but speed test
to measure. It's also theoretically possible (and in my opinion
not only likely but probably fairly common) for some large residential ISP's
to not rate-limit these on-net test sites (either by design or as a side
result of at what point in the network they apply the rate limiting),
thereby showing much
.
When the campus is filled (during the week) i can normally get close to 40
Mb down on a test.
-Grant
On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Scott Berkman sc...@sberkman.net wrote:
The MIT article is good read, thanks for sharing that.
One thing to watch out for is if the last mile provider
Basically it's a CYA statement on the part of Ookla/speedtest.net, since their
test sites are of varying quality. The Radnor, OH test site sometimes can't
even properly test a 10mbit SOHO broadband connection, where the Toledo site is
consistently able to flood every available bit of capacity
Hi,
Am having a debate on the results of speed tests sites.
Am interested in knowing the thoughts of different individuals in regards to
this.
Regards,
Jacob
They are completely unreliable and not to be trusted except for an occasional
general indication of speed.
--
Leigh Porter
On 23 Dec 2011, at 09:20, jacob miller mmzi...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
Am having a debate on the results of speed tests sites.
Am interested in knowing the
Couldn't agree more, it's unfortunate that so many users take them as
gospel!
On 12/23/2011 04:23 AM, Leigh Porter wrote:
They are completely unreliable and not to be trusted except for an occasional
general indication of speed.
They are very useful for like-for-like comparison, for an indication of
where your minimum performance levels are probably at, for a quick check
that things are working properly and as expected.
To determine the exact max effective speed? To test qos policies? To
determine whether you
]
Sent: Friday, December 23, 2011 4:19 AM
To: nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Speed Test Results
Hi,
Am having a debate on the results of speed tests sites.
Am interested in knowing the thoughts of different individuals in regards to
this.
Regards,
Jacob
for each test too. Works for our help desk to understand
relative performance and respond accordingly.
Trust nothing off your managed net.
Tate
On 12/23/2011 4:18 AM, jacob miller wrote:
Hi,
Am having a debate on the results of speed tests sites.
Am interested in knowing the thoughts
from a set of speed test
sites can be regarded as an indicator of local loop problems. Did you know that
local loops suffer from backhoe fade? And, DSLAMS fail.
In my home office, speed tests are just another useful diagnostic helping to
locate problem areas - just like in Paul's example
granular info
you should be using other tools
Subject: Re: Speed Test Results
From: james.cut...@consultant.com
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 09:02:01 -0500
To: nanog@nanog.org
On Dec 23, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Paul Stewart wrote:
In my opinion they are only somewhat reliable
(that's the difficult part).
Reading bad numbers is not necessarily an indication of a link problem.
Reading good enough numbers is only meaningful for the duration of the
test.
To me, the big problem is that they don't state all the details of the
tests (for example, how exactly to they do
in regards to
this.
They are just a measurement, which need to be correctly used and
interpreted (that's the difficult part).
Reading bad numbers is not necessarily an indication of a link problem.
Reading good enough numbers is only meaningful for the duration of the
test.
To me, the big
If you want to understand the issue in detail, check out the report from
MIT this year, written by Steve Bauer and available at
http://mitas.csail.mit.edu/papers/Bauer_Clark_Lehr_Broadband_Speed_Measurem
ents.pdf.
- Jason
On 12/23/11 4:18 AM, jacob miller mmzi...@yahoo.com wrote:
Hi,
Am
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 2:18 AM, jacob miller mmzi...@yahoo.com wrote:
Am having a debate on the results of speed tests sites.
Am interested in knowing the thoughts of different individuals in regards to
this.
It's one data point of many.
Depending on the speed test site, the protocols
301 - 400 of 558 matches
Mail list logo
