mak at aads.net
Fri Oct 28 16:02:19 UTC 1994
At 9:48 AM 10/27/94, Martin L. Schoffstall wrote:
>Merit/NSFNet already tackled these issues in an insufficent and unopen manner.
>MarkFedor/ColeLibby from PSI said there was a "quiet" admission that the old
>methodology was already "approved" for the SPRINT NAP.
Since it is not possible or desirable for NAP providers to collect
statistics on IP source/destination pairs, protocol types, or per-NSP
datagram counts, it seems that a different mechanism would be needed to do
engineering analyses to manage Internet performance and growth. The NSFNET
mechanism which used a device at each regional DMZ (nnstat or equivalent)
seemed like a good mechanism to do that, especially given the
research/education focus of the regionals. I suggest that it would be very
difficult to do this sort of monitoring on commercial networks. Why not
continue the NSFNET sponsored and approved method of placing collectors at
NSF-supported regional network DMZs even after the NSFNET transition, so
that we have at least a sampling of Internet traffic measurements.
More information about the NANOG