Gigabit speed test anybody?

Robert M. Enger enger at enger.us
Wed Mar 25 23:23:01 CDT 2009


The attachment circuits physical media was single mode dark fiber 
mid-span meet.  After some tinkering with colo center jumpers, the 
physical attachment circuits were rock solid.  The issue was the 
internal IP network of the ISP (or lack of same). 

You get what you pay for.  (At most.  Quite often, you get less.)



Frank Bulk wrote:
> If you're turning up a 10 GigE circuit, as a customer I would be asking for
> that circuit to be tested with some modern tools such as the JDSU T-BERD.
> For the price you're probably paying, it's probably not unreasonable to have
> it as part of the turn-up fee.
>
> Frank
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert M. Enger [mailto:enger at enger.us] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 10:23 PM
> To: ernst at easystreet.com
> Cc: nanog at nanog.org
> Subject: Re: Gigabit speed test anybody?
>
>
> I turned-up a pair of 10GigE circuits a while back (with a different, 
> unnamed carrier).
> They didn't perform too well.  When I pushed them for assistance with 
> testing, they revealed that they had multiple IPERF transponders 
> scattered throughout their network.
> They were not open to the public, but could be made available for short 
> periods of time (timer-based, requiring repeated re-authorization to use 
> them for an extended period).
>
> It seems likely that Level3 has similar (or superior) testing 
> facilities.  A call to some account executives may be required to open 
> the kimono. 
>
> Separately, the Super computer centers used to have speed-test servers 
> installed adjacent to their border routers.  They were dedicated, tuned 
> hosts specifically for speed testing.  One/more of them might be willing 
> to help you out.  However, unless one of them happens to use Level3 for 
> commercial transit, your performance will be gated by the excess 
> intervening network(s) and under all circumstances, by the competing 
> traffic on their access circuit.
>
> Finally, I echo the sentiments about avoiding disk I/O.
> If you do use FTP download for testing, you may wish to write the local 
> output to the null device.  Some ftp clients allow the null device to be 
> specified as the local output file when downloading files.  On XP 
> command-line FTP, the device "Nul:" is accepted.  On Un*x it is 
> /dev/null.   The command-line client on Server 2003 et al does not seem 
> to accept Nul as the local destination file when downloading.  (anyone 
> know the correct magic?)    Remember to download multiple times; 
> assuming the source server has enough ram, it will cache the file in 
> memory during the first download and successive downloads in rapid 
> succession should be essentially memory-to-memory (if you're using a 
> null device on the receiving end)
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Rick Ernst wrote:
>   
>> Resent from my subscribed address. Hopefully this isn't a dupe to anybody.
>> ---------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> I'm working on turning up our first GigE connection (400mbs CIR) and the
>> various online speedtests I'm aware of choke after about 100Mbs or so.
>>
>> Does anybody know of testing sites that can handle higher bandwidth, or
>> have an ftp host or similar to test against?
>>
>> I'm connected to Level3, backhauled to Seattle, WA.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rick
>>
>>
>>
>>   
>>     
>
>
>   




More information about the NANOG mailing list