One of the reasons that they asked to test/monitor it is because remote offices 
sometimes claim slow access , perhaps its when the links get saturated?

I would think  that the carrier/provider would be aware & report their findings 
to the client , after all it would be in the carriers best interest to increase 
($$$) the bandwidth.




> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 15:43:58 -0700
> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] MPLS monitoring / testing
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> 
> Only if you expect all of the hub sites to saturate their links.
> 
> Kurt
> 
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 2:42 PM, J- P <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Looking at this again today,  if the main location has 50mb, and the 9 sites
> > combined total 93mb,
> >
> > shouldn't the main site's tunnel be equal to (93) or greater than the sum of
> > the other site to get full throughput?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: [email protected]
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] MPLS monitoring / testing
> > Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:25:58 -0400
> >
> >
> > wow,
> >
> > here;s the breakdown all in megs (site numbers then bandwidth  i.e site 1.
> > has a 50 meg)
> >
> > 1. HQ 50
> >
> > 2. 9
> >
> > 3. 10
> >
> > 4. 30
> >
> > 5. 10
> >
> > 6. 10
> >
> > 7. 10
> >
> > 8. 4
> >
> > 9. 10
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Jean-Paul Natola
> >
> >
> >
> >> From: [email protected]
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] MPLS monitoring / testing
> >> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 04:00:26 +0000
> >>
> >> Confirm your routing to ensure the proper path is taken.
> >>
> >> MTR and PsPing have been tools I've used in the past to measure latency
> >> and conduct bandwidth tests. Use nping for more advanced features.
> >>
> >> Consider that the time, specific day and ISP provider hops between your
> >> networks will affect traffic flows. You can also call the provider to speak
> >> with a technician who can conduct tests between their gear.
> >>
> >> What is the bandwidth of the MPLS link that has been purchased?
> >>
> >> Hope this helps.
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [email protected]
> >> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kurt Buff
> >> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:46 PM
> >> To: ntsysadm
> >> Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] MPLS monitoring / testing
> >>
> >> For bandwidth validation, one very good tool is iperf/jperf. I believe
> >> it's hosted by Google, but I haven't used it in a while.
> >>
> >> There is a Windows port of it.
> >>
> >> Ah, this is the mothership, but no Windows port.
> >> https://code.google.com/p/iperf/
> >>
> >> For a Windows port, try here:
> >> https://iperf.fr/
> >>
> >> Kurt
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 5:33 PM, J- P <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > Went to new site and one the tasks was to monitor the MPLS VPN
> >> > tunnels , truth be told I always thought this was done by the carrier,
> >> > , furthermore I have never EVER been on a site that used MPLS,
> >> >
> >> > It seems what they are primarily asking is "are we getting the
> >> > throughput we are paying for"
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > So , does anyone know of any tools or tests that can be used for this,
> >> > what it seems they are?
> >> >
> >> > OH, and just to clarify, the reason I accepted the project in the
> >> > first place was because initially it was to be an internal LAN
> >> > assessment, the MPLS stuff was added afterwards.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> IMPORTANT NOTICE: Without the use of secure encryption, the Internet is
> >> not a secure medium and privacy cannot be ensured. Internet e-mail is
> >> vulnerable to interception, misuse and forging. Equitable cannot ensure the
> >> privacy and authenticity of any information sent by way of the public
> >> Internet. Equitable will not be responsible for any damages you may incur 
> >> if
> >> you communicate confidential and personal information to us over the
> >> Internet or if we communicate such information to you at your request. This
> >> e-mail and any attachments are confidential, may be covered by legal
> >> professional privilege or exempt from disclosure under applicable law, and
> >> are intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient,
> >> you are not authorized to and must not disclose, copy, distribute or retain
> >> any or part of this e-mail and any attachments without written permission 
> >> of
> >> The Equitable Life Insurance Company of Canada.
> 
> 
                                          

Reply via email to