Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!

Michael Dillon michael at
Fri Jun 27 20:39:51 UTC 1997

>Thanks for the suggestions. We're considering doing a follow-up and
>perhaps making
>this a regular feature every 2 or 4 months thereafter. We've received a
>few suggestions
>for methodology changes/enhancements,

I just thought of another solution to the problem of too many variables.
The numbers that you came up with this time are essentially meaningless
because there are so many variables involved that shift from time to time,
and by taking one month of measurements and boiling it down to a single
number, you simply don't learn anything useful. However, if you were to do
a similar test and come up with a single number for each day and then plot
that number for one month, then it would show some useful info. If a
provider has one bad day, it doesn't blow their average but it is still
clearly visible. And if a provider has 10 bad days, then that is also
visible and is arguably more useful than a single number which might be
seen as implying a slower network. Personally, I would rate an erratic
network as far worse than a slower one.

Michael Dillon                    voice: +1-415-482-2840
Senior Systems Architect            fax: +1-415-482-2844

"The People You Know.  The People You Trust."

More information about the NANOG mailing list