Home page logo

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: Speedtest Results speedtest.net vs Mikrotik bandwidth test
From: Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:43:52 -0400

On Thu, 04 Apr 2013 17:29:40 +0200, Mikael Abrahamsson said:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2013, Valdis.Kletnieks () vt edu wrote:

RFC4989 TCP Extended Statistics MIB. M. Mathis, J. Heffner, R.
    Raghunarayan. May 2007. (Format: TXT=153768 bytes) (Status: PROPOSED

Looks like a taker to me.  Also, see the work the Web10G group is doing for
Linux: http://www.web10g.org

RFC 4989 doesn't seem to officially exist. Ah, it's 4898.

Bargh. How did I get a typo in there? :)

Yes, RFC4898 seems to contain a lot of interesting information, question
is how to destill this down to something the user can understand and that
is of interest for a support engineer who might be trying to diagnose the
customer problem.

I agree web10g seems to be of interest as well. I'm going to read through
their documents tomorrow.

I recently got the web10g folks and the Linux kernel and networking folks
talking to each other, it may get upstreamed in the reasonably near future.
I'll make sure somebody keeps this list informed....

Attachment: _bin

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]