latency (was: RE: cooling door)

Sun Mar 30 17:18:27 UTC 2008

Thanks for the clarification; that's why I put the "seems to" in the reply.

Fred Reimer, CISSP, CCNP, CQS-VPN, CQS-ISS
Senior Network Engineer
Coleman Technologies, Inc.
954-298-1697

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nanog at merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog at merit.edu] On Behalf Of
> Mikael Abrahamsson
> Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 12:30 PM
> To: nanog at merit.edu
> Subject: RE: latency (was: RE: cooling door)
> 
> 
> On Sun, 30 Mar 2008, Fred Reimer wrote:
> 
> > application to take advantage of the networks' capabilities.   Mikael
> (seems
> > to) complain that developers have to put latency inducing
> applications into
> > the development environment.  I'd say that those developers are some
> of the
> > few who actually have a clue, and are doing the right thing.
> 
> I was definately not complaining, I brought it up as an example where
> developers have clue and where they're doing the right thing.
> 
> I've too often been involved in customer complaints which ended up
> being
> the fault of Microsoft SMB and the customers having the firm idea that
> it
> must be a network problem since MS is a world standard and that can't
> be
> changed. Even proposing to change TCP Window settings to get FTP
> transfers
> quicker is met with the same sceptisism.
> 
> Even after describing to them about the propagation delay of light in
> fiber and the physical limitations, they're still very suspicious about
> it
> all.
> 
> --
> Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3080 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20080330/04723cb6/attachment.bin>