[j-nsp] Accuracy of interface stats

[Christoph Blecker]

Additionally, if you're running it as OC-192 with SONET, as opposed to
10GbE, the saturation point is lower due to the additional overhead of
the SONET protocol. It's like the theoretical of an OC48 is 2.488Gbps,
but you can experience saturation as low as 2.2-2.3Gbps.

As was stated before, time for an upgrade!

Cheers,
-Christoph

Shane Short wrote:
> You'll find that 9.2Gbps was the 5minute average-- you were probably
> bursting well above that frequently, hence the drops.
> 
> There was a massive discussion about this on the nanog list, depending
> on the type traffic your transiting, you shouldn't run your link at
> hotter than 70-90%
> 
> Time for an upgrade :)
> 
> -Shane
> 
> On 27/09/2009, at 1:59 PM, The Drifter wrote:
> 
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> How sensitive/accurate is the show interface statistics in capturing
>> the real time flow of traffic?
>>
>> When monitoring the OC-192 interface the peak utilization on the
>> interface and MRTG was showing 9.2Gbps. But, there were packet losses
>> clocking by second!
>>
>>
>>
>> Is this because the interface statistics are not capable of
>> capturing/reflecting  high bandwidth OC-48,OC-192,etc traffic patterns?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jimmy
>>                        
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Invite your mail contacts to join your friends list with Windows Live
>> Spaces. It's easy!
>> http://spaces.live.com/spacesapi.aspx?wx_action=create&wx_url=/friends.aspx&mkt=en-us
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> 
> _______________________________________________
> juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp