Re: [Phil Dykstra: more interesting numbers]


Thomas Narten (narten@purdue.edu)
Thu, 14 Apr 88 21:31:40 EST


> Almost half the core traffic seems to be routing updates.

How true is that statement? The stats I have seen come from core
gateways. Hardly a representative sample. Ignoring mailbridge traffic,
one expects "real" traffic to go to and from "hosts", where hosts are
non-core gateways to LANs, NSFnet, etc. An interesting statistic is
last week's traffic stats for the purdue LSI-11 EGP core server:

GWY RCVD RCVD IP % IP DEST % DST
NAME DGRAMS BYTES ERRORS ERRORS UNRCH UNRCH
PURDUE 7,184,830 1,097,986,642 101 0.00% 27,954 0.39%

GWY SENT SENT DROPPED % DROPPED
NAME DGRAMS BYTES DGRAMS DGRAMS
PURDUE 7,557,696 1,424,771,755 24,090 0.32%

That's an average of 11.9 and 12.5 pps respectively. The funny thing
is, Purdue directs all its traffic out through its Butterfly gateway;
the only Purdue traffic traveling through the LSI-11 would be
misrouted packets.

If we assume that an EGP connection exchanges one hello/I-H-U packet
every 60 seconds, and one fragmented and one unfragmented NR update in
place of a hello/I-H-U every 180 seconds, one expects 9 EGP packets
every 180 seconds, 4 to the LSI, 5 from it. In addition, if we (over)
estimate the number of EGP peers the 11 maintains at 260, egp traffic
accounts for 260*(4/180) = 5.8 pps RCVD, 260*(5/180) = 7.2 pps SENT.
Certainly GGP doesn't consume the remaining 5 pps. Who is responsible
for the remaining traffic?

Thomas Narten



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:41:55 GMT