On Nov 28, 2006, at 6:14 PM, Rich Allen wrote:

the round trip time reported on the G4 Xserve probe (OS 10.2) is reported incorrectly. the reported time is 1000 times greater than actual; ie. 767 msec is reported for 0.767 msec. verified this using ping from several other
boxes/OSs

IM v4.5.1, probe is "Xserve G4 Probe" that was installed with IM

The RTT of different probes will show deviation because different probes measure different aspects of behavior. The ping probe should have the smallest RTT; it just tests network connectivity of a single packet. The XServe probe and other probes test network connectivity and server responsiveness. (In some cases, there is a little overhead within InterMapper itself.) When InterMapper probes an XServe (non- Intel version), it makes a TCP connection to a specific port. Once the connection is established, InterMapper issues a request for information, then awaits the full response. As the response is returned, InterMapper parses out the fields and populates variables within the probe. The RTT of the XServe probe is thus the total time it takes from connection establishment until status determination. Since IM has to parse the entire response in an Xserve probe, it has to download all of the data.

When the status is determined varies for different probes. For example, the status of an HTTP probe is determined when the "string to match" is found. To measure the time it takes a web server to *start* returning a page, specify start tag "<html>". To measure the time it takes the web server to return the entire page, specify the end tag: "</html>". With larger web pages, you'll see different response times based on the string to match.

One of my current issues with RTT alarming in 4.5.x is that the default settings don't reflect differences between probes.

Regards,

Bill Fisher
Dartware, 
LLC____________________________________________________________________
List archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/intermapper-talk%40list.dartware.com/
To unsubscribe: send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to