Randy,
On 18/09/2013 03:39, Randy Bush ra...@psg.com wrote:
somehow, a serious case of testosterone poisoning combined with insane
goal drift has hit a number of the large european exchanges. instead of
the goal being how well they serve their local communities, they have
gone wild with sleazy
* ra...@psg.com (Randy Bush) [Thu 19 Sep 2013, 03:16 CEST]:
you gotta love the amsix hkg charlie foxtrot.
and how is that working out financially for the amsix members,
the folk in the amsterdam area the amsix purportedly serves,
niels?
All relevant paperwork including business plans was made
* n...@foobar.org (Nick Hilliard) [Thu 19 Sep 2013, 01:38 CEST]:
On 18/09/2013 23:55, Niels Bakker wrote:
Ding ding ding! And that's why honest IXPs graph both, to show
that they have no packet loss on their inter-switch links.
If in out, it's not necessarily inter-switch packet loss. The
On 19 Sep 2013, at 12:32, Niels Bakker niels=na...@bakker.net wrote:
I know you're a busy man so the tl;dr is that by encouraging local peering
more networks will start to peer, and by partnering with one or more local
carriers those new networks as well as established players in those
But isn't this all just neo-colonialism? Establish a market in the colony,
but ensure through restrictive trade practices that all trade routes lead
back via the mother country.
Or can I buy myself connectivity to AMS-IX Amsterdam when i'm present at the
LINX Harare exchange?
There are
One other important point to note. Anyone can turn up an exchange in
N/A and be supported by the same. So far, only the current cadre of
IXP's have stepped up to help.
US entities are instead busy acquiring meet- me rooms to further box us all
in even more.
On Sep 17, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Niels Bakker niels=na...@bakker.net wrote:
I don't know of any IXP that does this. Industry standard is as you and
others wrote before: the 5-minute counter difference on all customer-facing
ports, publishing both input and output bps and pps.
I guess MRTG is
* bickn...@ufp.org (Leo Bicknell) [Wed 18 Sep 2013, 19:23 CEST]:
On Sep 17, 2013, at 3:15 PM, Niels Bakker niels=na...@bakker.net wrote:
I don't know of any IXP that does this. Industry standard is as
you and others wrote before: the 5-minute counter difference on
all customer-facing ports,
On 18/09/2013 18:23, Leo Bicknell wrote:
Serious question, at an IXP shouldn't IN = OUT nearly perfectly?
if you host multicast on your unicast peering lan, then this will be
affected by the unicast:multicast ratio and the number of recipient ports.
Most networks which support multicast will
* ra...@psg.com (Randy Bush) [Wed 18 Sep 2013, 04:39 CEST]:
somehow, a serious case of testosterone poisoning combined with insane
goal drift has hit a number of the large european exchanges. instead of
the goal being how well they serve their local communities, they have
gone wild with sleazy
Ding ding ding! And that's why honest IXPs graph both, to show that
they have no packet loss on their inter-switch links.
It depends on what is being measured. At TorIX we'll see deviations
between in/out on our aggregate graph. As we combine all peer ports to
form the aggregate graph,
On 18/09/2013 23:55, Niels Bakker wrote:
Ding ding ding! And that's why honest IXPs graph both, to show that they
have no packet loss on their inter-switch links.
If in out, it's not necessarily inter-switch packet loss. The difference
between the two will also include packet loss for
somehow, a serious case of testosterone poisoning combined with insane
goal drift has hit a number of the large european exchanges. instead of
the goal being how well they serve their local communities, they have
gone wild with sleazy means of having traffic contests, doing really
sick
you gotta love the amsix hkg charlie foxtrot.
and how is that working out financially for the amsix members,
the folk in the amsterdam area the amsix purportedly serves,
niels?
randy
Hi,
many Internet exchange points post publicly available graphs which
describe aggregated traffic volumes on IX. For example:
Netnod: http://www.netnod.se/ix-stats/sums/
AMS-IX: https://www.ams-ix.net/technical/statistics
LINX: https://www.linx.net/pubtools/trafficstats.html
Is there a common
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013, Martin T wrote:
Is there a common method to count this traffic on a switch-fabric? Just
read all the switch interface packets input counters with an interval
to get the aggregated input traffic and read all the switch interfaces
packets output counters to get the
On 17/09/2013 11:52, Martin T wrote:
Is there a common method to count this traffic on a switch-fabric?
Just read all the switch interface packets input counters with an
interval to get the aggregated input traffic and read all the switch
interfaces packets output counters to get the
On Sep 17, 2013, at 07:02 , Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
On 17/09/2013 11:52, Martin T wrote:
Is there a common method to count this traffic on a switch-fabric?
Just read all the switch interface packets input counters with an
interval to get the aggregated input traffic and read all
Thanks for all the replies!
Nick,
counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't it?
I mean if input bytes and output bytes on all the ports facing the
IX members are already counted, then counting traffic on links between
the switches in fabric will count some of the traffic
On 17/09/2013 14:43, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
And yes, DE-CIX is more than well aware everyone thinks this is .. uh ..
let's just call it silly for now, although most would use far more
disparaging words. Which is probably why no serious IXP does it.
It's not silly - it's just not what
On Sep 17, 2013, at 11:04 , Nick Hilliard n...@foobar.org wrote:
On 17/09/2013 14:43, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
And yes, DE-CIX is more than well aware everyone thinks this is .. uh ..
let's just call it silly for now, although most would use far more
disparaging words. Which is probably why
On Sep 17, 2013, at 12:11 , Martin T m4rtn...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for all the replies!
Nick,
counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't it?
I mean if input bytes and output bytes on all the ports facing the
IX members are already counted, then counting
On 17/09/2013 2:15 PM, Patrick W. Gilmore wrote:
On Sep 17, 2013, at 12:11 , Martin T m4rtn...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for all the replies!
Nick,
counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't it?
I mean if input bytes and output bytes on all the ports facing the
IX
On 9/17/2013 2:51 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 07:11:23PM +0300, Martin T wrote:
counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't it?
I mean if input bytes and output bytes on all the ports facing the
IX members are already counted, then
In a message written on Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 07:11:23PM +0300, Martin T wrote:
counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't it?
I mean if input bytes and output bytes on all the ports facing the
IX members are already counted, then counting traffic on links between
the
In a message written on Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 07:11:23PM +0300, Martin T wrote:
counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't
it? I mean if input bytes and output bytes on all the ports
facing the IX members are already counted, then counting traffic
on links between the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 17/09/2013 20:15, Patrick W. Gilmore a écrit :
Hi,
Good reading, to get an idea:
https://www1.ethz.ch/csg/people/dimitroc/papers/p95pam.pdf
Section 3, mainly.
Cheers,
mh
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Le 17/09/2013 20:15, Patrick W. Gilmore a écrit :
On Sep 17, 2013, at 12:11 , Martin T m4rtn...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for all the replies!
Nick,
counting traffic on inter-switch links is kind of cheating, isn't it?
I mean if input bytes
somehow, a serious case of testosterone poisoning combined with insane
goal drift has hit a number of the large european exchanges. instead of
the goal being how well they serve their local communities, they have
gone wild with sleazy means of having traffic contests, doing really
sick attempts
29 matches
Mail list logo
