On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Paul Graydon <p...@paulgraydon.co.uk>wrote:
> Hmm.. sure, I'd expected there to be some performance loss due to that, > but I guess I didn't really expect that the result would complete failure, > that "a little while after opening a socket and sending data, the sending > side would stop sending data." I suppose that could be as much an > application level reaction as network, though. > > It wasn't that unusual to end up dealing with packet loss on WANs when I > was part of an ISPs NOC team, but I don't think I ever dealt with it where > it could cause an application to completely fail. Understandably the > customers who would spot packet loss problems the soonest would be those > who used their connections for VoIP where the disruption would naturally > cause the audible glitches. While, as Doug said, the use of aggregated links is nothing new, most of their use has been within the datacenter LAN until relatively recently; I think that it's a fairly recent development (past 3-5 years or so, say) for aggregated links to come into widespread use in the WAN. (Yes, you've been able to channel bond T1 links forever, for example, my point is that relatively few people _did_ until fairly recently, even though they _could_; it was more common to step up to a fractional DS3, for example, than to aggregate multiple T1 to get the equivalent bandwidth.) In-datacenter LANs tend to be far less lossy than WANs. So while aggregated links aren't really new, aggregated links over lossy WAN circuits _are_ somewhat new... And folks are still learning how they work, and how to troubleshoot them. -Brent
_______________________________________________ Tech mailing list Tech@lists.lopsa.org https://lists.lopsa.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech This list provided by the League of Professional System Administrators http://lopsa.org/
