You are right [was Re: Ungodly packet loss rates]
alex at relcom.eu.net
alex at relcom.eu.net
Wed Oct 23 12:49:45 UTC 1996
>
> Well, besides being interesting ISP comparison *may* not be as objective and
> informative as we'd like to. In addition, what technique do you propose for
> such comparison? Just asking customers aren't enough, IMHO. And you can't
> count *every* ISP, even in the US...
As for me, it is interesting two technoques used simultaneously:
1) Journal asks ISP to make dialup-IP and 64K account for the testing;
and asks where they coud try T1 connection.
2) Journal bue (anonimously) dialup account from the same ISP's.
Then, every day in 1 months (or some 5 different days during this months)
they measure CPS for - WWW to some interesting pages, FTP from some servers,
quality of real-audio connections, etc...
Then (since 1 months) it will be very interestind data.
But I am afrayd we'll see quite another picture - "we prefere XXX because
they sell dialup-kit with MS Exploper, and do not recommend YYY because
in our ONLY ftp test from www.cisco.com CPS was 5% less than in our 10
ftp tests via XXX_, or something simular.
>
> My 2c,
>
>
> Edgar
>
>
> --
> Edgar V.S. Der-Danieliantz Armenia Network Information Center
> hostmaster at amnic.net Azatootianne 1, Yerevan, Armenia
>
>
---
Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 239-10-10, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)
More information about the NANOG
mailing list