On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 07:40:08PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The discussion on peak vs average is worth understanding as is the fact that
> a link that is 80% utilized will suffer a lot of latency and has no room for
> significant down time.
>
> 80% average utilization is way high in my
At 11:01 PM 10/3/99 -0300, Eric Dahnke wrote:
>> On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
>> > Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
>> >
>> > A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
>> > size was 23K.
>> >
>> > Thx
>>
>> You're not t
> On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
> > Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
> >
> > A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
> > size was 23K.
> >
> > Thx
>
> You're not taking into account how the router will handle the traff
On Sun, 03 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
> Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
>
> A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
> size was 23K.
>
> Thx
You're not taking into account how the router will handle the traffic. You can
comp
Forgive me if the two posts from Eric were not related:
saturating a T1:
Todd presents a good formula, but this is not taking into account anything but the
message size. As Stan mentions, email size is not a good indicator of total network
traffic - even if you are only in the
Rumor has it that Todd A. Jacobs may have mentioned these words:
>On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
>
>> A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
>> size was 23K.
>
>Not really. You need to differentiate peak load from sustained.
>
> (average message size) * (num
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
> A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
> size was 23K.
Not really. You need to differentiate peak load from sustained.
(average message size) * (number of messages per hour)
-
On Sat, 2 Oct 1999, Eric Dahnke wrote:
>
> Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
>
> A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
> size was 23K.
I would not bet on it. The average message size is not an indicator of
network traffic.
Someone will scold me for this post, but would appreciate any thoughts:
A T1 would be ~ 80% utilized passing 22,000msgs/hr if the average msg
size was 23K.
Thx
