home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.sys.cisco
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!yale.edu!yale!gumby!destroyer!ncar!csn!boulder!recnews
- From: "Craig A. Finseth" <fin@unet.umn.edu>
- Subject: X.25 line utilization???
- In-Reply-To: Dana J. Dawson's message of Fri, 28 Aug 92 16:28:09 CDT <9208282128.AA10330@taurus.cray.com>
- Message-ID: <199208311637.AA10973@norge.unet.umn.edu>
- Sender: news@colorado.edu
- Date: 31 Aug 1992 11:37:56 -0500
- Lines: 29
-
- ...
- other direction. To me, saying that a line is being utilized at 100%
- of capacity means that no more traffic will fit. That is not the
- case when one bases such utilization numbers on just the larger of
- the IN/OUT traffic. This may not be the most mathematical approach
- to this problem, but most users (and bosses) don't care about technically
- correct statistics - they want numbers that make sense, and that give
- a real measure of how much of what they're paying for is actually
- getting used.
-
- I agree with you that most users want numbers that "make sense."
- However, "making sense" is what is being suggested. A line
- utilization of 100% in one direction and 0% the other is "technically"
- only 50%. However, that user is probably screaming (well, asking at
- least) for more bandwidth and is not interested in hearing that the
- link is only used 50%....
-
- Actually, I always treat the two directions of a serial link
- separately and calculate separate utilizations. (Of course, they have
- to be upgraded at the same time (:-).) It is often useful to look for
- substantial asymmetries, as they provide clues as to what is going on
- in the net.
-
- Craig A. Finseth fin@unet.umn.edu [CAF13]
- Networking Services +1 612 624 3375 desk
- Computer and Information Services +1 612 625 0006 problems
- University of Minnesota +1 612 626 1002 fax
- 130 Lind Hall, 207 Church St SE
- Minneapolis MN 55455-0134, USA
-