On 15/Aug/20 12:32, Etienne-Victor Depasquale wrote:
> +1
>
> You can't foresee everything, but no plan means foreseeing nothing, =
> blindfold.
In the absence of guidance from your Sales team on a forecast, keep the
50% threshold trigger, and standardize on lead times if urgent
feasibilities
On 15/Aug/20 11:35, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> No plan survives contact with the enemy. Your careful made growth
> projection was fine until the brass made a deal with some major
> customer, which caused a traffic spike. Or any infinite other events
> that could and eventually will happen to you.
On 15/Aug/20 10:47, Etienne-Victor Depasquale wrote:
> I've seen the weekly profiles of traffic sourced from caches for the
> major global services (video, social media, search and general) for a
> specific metro area.
>
> For all services, the weekly profile is a repetition of the daily
> prof
On 15/Aug/20 01:45, Radu-Adrian Feurdean wrote:
>
> I think you're over-confident.
If you can resist the "let me make a plan" offer that CFO's would want
you to give them, you can be confident :-). Because when it hits the
fan, the CFO will say, "But Feurdean said he would make a plan. If he
t
+1
You can't foresee everything, but no plan means foreseeing nothing, =
blindfold.
Cheers,
Etienne
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 12:29 PM Radu-Adrian Feurdean <
na...@radu-adrian.feurdean.net> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2020, at 11:35, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> > No plan survives contact with the enem
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020, at 11:35, Baldur Norddahl wrote:
> No plan survives contact with the enemy. Your careful made growth
> projection was fine until the brass made a deal with some major
> customer, which caused a traffic spike.
Capacity planning also includes keeping an eye on what is being
No plan survives contact with the enemy. Your careful made growth
projection was fine until the brass made a deal with some major customer,
which caused a traffic spike. Or any infinite other events that could and
eventually will happen to you.
One hard thing, that almost everyone will get wrong a
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020, at 02:39, Louie Lee wrote:
> get an understanding of your traffic growth and try to project when you
> will reach that number. You have to decide whether you care about the
> occasional peak, or the consistent peak, or somewhere in between, like
> weekday vs weekends, etc.
I've seen the weekly profiles of traffic sourced from caches for the major
global services (video, social media, search and general) for a specific
metro area.
For all services, the weekly profile is a repetition of the daily profile,
within +/- 20%.
That is: the weekly profile is obtained from th
Beyond a pure percentage, you might want to account for the time it takes
you stay below a certain threshold. If you want to target a certain link to
keep your 95th percentile peaks below 70%, then first get an understanding
of your traffic growth and try to project when you will reach that number.
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020, at 12:31, Mark Tinka wrote:
> I'm confident everyone (even the cheapest CFO) knows the consequences of
> congesting a link and choosing not to upgrade it.
I think you're over-confident.
> It's great to monitor packet loss, latency, pps, e.t.c. But packet loss
> at 10% link u
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020, at 09:31, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as
> well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80% capacity?
> 90%? 95%?
Some reflections about link capacity:
At 90% and over, you should panic.
Between
On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 12:33 AM Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as well as
> peering and transit links that are congested? At 80% capacity? 90%? 95%?
Hi Hank,
As others have noted, the answer is rarely that simple.
First, what is yo
>
> There is rarely a one sized fits all answer when it comes to these
> things.
>
Absolutely true: every application has characteristic QoS parameters.
Unfortunately, it seems that 5-minute averages of data rates through links
are the one-size-fits-all answer ... which doesn't fit all.
Etienne
It is possible to gather a lot of information about buffers and queues, at
least with the vendors we work with. That can be very helpful in a lot of
ways. :)
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 9:21 AM Baldur Norddahl
wrote:
> Is it possible to do and is anyone monitoring metrics such as max queue
> length
>
> Wouldn't it be better to measure the basic performance like packet drop
> rates and queue sizes ?
>
Those values should be a standard part of monitoring and data collection,
but if they happen to MATTER or not in a given situation very much depends.
The traffic profile traversing the link may
<http://www.thebrotherswisp.com/>
> <https://www.facebook.com/thebrotherswisp>
> <https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXSdfxQv7SpoRQYNyLwntZg>
> ------
> *From: *"Baldur Norddahl"
> *To: *nanog@nanog.org
> *Sent: *Thursday, August 13, 2
August 13, 2020 8:20:26 AM
Subject: Re: Bottlenecks and link upgrades
Is it possible to do and is anyone monitoring metrics such as max queue length
in 5 minutes intervals? Might be a better metric than average load in 5 minutes
intervals.
Regards
Baldur
Is it possible to do and is anyone monitoring metrics such as max queue
length in 5 minutes intervals? Might be a better metric than average load
in 5 minutes intervals.
Regards
Baldur
On 13/Aug/20 13:44, Olav Kvittem wrote:
> sure, but I guess the loss rate depends of the nature of the traffic.
Packet loss is packet loss.
Some applications are more sensitive to it (live video, live voice, for
example), while others are less so. However, packet loss always
manifests badly
Hi Mark,
Just comments on your points below.
On 13.08.2020 12:31, Mark Tinka wrote:
>
> On 13/Aug/20 12:23, Olav Kvittem via NANOG wrote:
>
>> Wouldn't it be better to measure the basic performance like packet
>> drop rates and queue sizes ?
>>
>> These days live video is needed and these parame
On 13/Aug/20 13:00, Nick Hilliard wrote:
>
> you could easily have 10% utilization and see packet loss due to
> insufficient bandwidth if you have egress << ingress and
> proportionally low buffering, e.g. UDP or iSCSI from a 40G/100 port
> with egress to a low-buffer 1G port.
>
> This sort of
Mark Tinka wrote on 13/08/2020 11:31:
It's great to monitor packet loss, latency, pps, e.t.c. But packet loss
at 10% link utilization is not a foreign occurrence. No amount of
bandwidth upgrades will fix that.
you could easily have 10% utilization and see packet loss due to
insufficient bandw
On 13/Aug/20 12:23, Olav Kvittem via NANOG wrote:
> Wouldn't it be better to measure the basic performance like packet
> drop rates and queue sizes ?
>
> These days live video is needed and these parameters are essential to
> the quality.
>
> Queues are building up in milliseconds and people ar
On 12.08.2020 09:31, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
>
> At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as
> well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80%
> capacity? 90%? 95%?
>
Hi,
Wouldn't it be better to measure the basic performance like packet drop
rates and qu
>
> With tongue in cheek, one could say that measured instantaneously, the
> load on a link is always either zero or 100% link rate...
>
Actually, that's a first-class observation !
On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:00 PM Simon Leinen
wrote:
> m Taichi writes:
> > Just my curiosity. May I ask how we c
On 13/Aug/20 11:56, Simon Leinen wrote:
> I'd be curious whether other operators have such alert rules, and what
> N/M/X/Y they use - might well be different values for different kinds of
> links.
We use alerts to tell us about links that hit a threshold, in our NMS.
But yes, this is based on
m Taichi writes:
> Just my curiosity. May I ask how we can measure the link capacity
> loading? What does it mean by a 50%, 70%, or 90% capacity loading?
> Load sampled and measured instantaneously, or averaging over a certain
> period of time (granularity)?
Very good question!
With tongue in che
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as well as
peering and transit links that are congested? At
80% capacity? 90%? 95%?
Thanks,
Hank
Caveat: The views expressed above are solely my own and do not express the
vi
When I worked for an ISP, it was about 70%, not sure if that is the case
with the other ones.
On 8/12/2020 3:31 AM, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as
well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80%
capacity? 90%? 95%?
T
Just my curiosity. May I ask how we can measure the link capacity loading?
What does it mean by a 50%, 70%, or 90% capacity loading? Load sampled and
measured instantaneously, or averaging over a certain period of time
(granularity)?
These are questions have bothered me for long. Don't know if I c
On 12/Aug/20 17:08, m.Taichi wrote:
> Just my curiosity. May I ask how we can measure the link capacity
> loading? What does it mean by a 50%, 70%, or 90% capacity loading?
> Load sampled and measured instantaneously, or averaging over a certain
> period of time (granularity)?
>
> These are que
On 12/Aug/20 17:08, m.Taichi wrote:
>
> Just my curiosity. May I ask how we can measure the link capacity
> loading? What does it mean by a 50%, 70%, or 90% capacity loading?
> Load sampled and measured instantaneously, or averaging over a certain
> period of time (granularity)?
>
> These are q
On 12/Aug/20 09:44, Saku Ytti wrote:
> Personally if the link is in a growth market, you should upgrade
> really early, 50% seems late, cost is negligible if you anticipate
> growth to continue. If it's not a growth market cost may become less
> than negligible.
The problem you have is "what i
On 12/Aug/20 09:31, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as
> well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80%
> capacity? 90%? 95%?
>
We start the process at 50% utilization, and work toward completing the
upgrade by 70% util
On Wed, 12 Aug 2020 at 10:35, Hank Nussbacher wrote:
> At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone as well as
> peering and transit links that are congested? At 80% capacity? 90%? 95%?
I've worked for employees where policy has been anywhere from 50% or
80%. And I know t
At what point do commercial ISPs upgrade links in their backbone
as well as peering and transit links that are congested? At 80%
capacity? 90%? 95%?
Thanks,
Hank
Caveat: The views expressed above are solely my own and do not
expres
37 matches
Mail list logo
