<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: 30% throughput on ethernet uk-ireland, 3 carriers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/30-throughput-on-ethernet-uk-ireland-3-carriers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/30-throughput-on-ethernet-uk-ireland-3-carriers/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2013 01:19:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: labnuke99</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/30-throughput-on-ethernet-uk-ireland-3-carriers/#comment-51292</link>
		<dc:creator>labnuke99</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 14:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-51292</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[pathping is an excellent troubleshooting utility to look at latency &amp; packet loss along a path. 

Usage: pathping [-g host-list] [-h maximum_hops] [-i address] [-n]
                [-p period] [-q num_queries] [-w timeout] [-P] [-R] [-T]
                [-4] [-6] target_name

Options:
    -g host-list     Loose source route along host-list.
    -h maximum_hops  Maximum number of hops to search for target.
    -i address       Use the specified source address.
    -n               Do not resolve addresses to hostnames.
    -p period        Wait period milliseconds between pings.
    -q num_queries   Number of queries per hop.
    -w timeout       Wait timeout milliseconds for each reply.
    -P               Test for RSVP PATH connectivity.
    -R               Test if each hop is RSVP aware.
    -T               Test connectivity to each hop with Layer-2 priority tags.
    -4               Force using IPv4.
    -6               Force using IPv6.

It&#039;s not a gui but it does give very valuable information within a single utility about the path between a source &amp; destination.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>pathping is an excellent troubleshooting utility to look at latency &amp; packet loss along a path. </p>
<p>Usage: pathping [-g host-list] [-h maximum_hops] [-i address] [-n]<br />
                [-p period] [-q num_queries] [-w timeout] [-P] [-R] [-T]<br />
                [-4] [-6] target_name</p>
<p>Options:<br />
    -g host-list     Loose source route along host-list.<br />
    -h maximum_hops  Maximum number of hops to search for target.<br />
    -i address       Use the specified source address.<br />
    -n               Do not resolve addresses to hostnames.<br />
    -p period        Wait period milliseconds between pings.<br />
    -q num_queries   Number of queries per hop.<br />
    -w timeout       Wait timeout milliseconds for each reply.<br />
    -P               Test for RSVP PATH connectivity.<br />
    -R               Test if each hop is RSVP aware.<br />
    -T               Test connectivity to each hop with Layer-2 priority tags.<br />
    -4               Force using IPv4.<br />
    -6               Force using IPv6.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not a gui but it does give very valuable information within a single utility about the path between a source &amp; destination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thomas stocking</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/30-throughput-on-ethernet-uk-ireland-3-carriers/#comment-51274</link>
		<dc:creator>thomas stocking</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:50:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-51274</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[As a monitoring specialist, I see this as an interesting problem. I would suspect that the issue is not so much throughput as latency. Some simple tests would tell you, assuming ICMP is enabled:
I would start with traceroute through the link, looking at the latency of the various carriers. I&#039;m a fan of the command line tools, but  if you like GUIs, you might try a tool called Visualroute if you are on MS Windows (http://www.visualroute.com/), or Mtr on Linux/Unix (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mtr_%28My_traceroute%29). As the answer above states, it will be hard to separate disk I/O from network issues with an FTP test. 
If you do see latency or packet loss with ICMP in a link, you can use that information to work with the carrier in question. 
If latency is not the problem, you can watch the end point routers for late collisions and other packet errors. We use Cacti to do this, and set up graphs and thresholds to alert us when we do see bandwidth max out, or if packet errors start to show up. Errors that show up in these graphs speak to router overload and line quality issues. 
If you have control of your end point routers, you might also use Cacti to look at the CPU and memory utilization on them, and make sure they are adequate for the job. Of course, it&#039;s unlikely that you will get that kind of data from the intermediate routers, as they are managed by the carriers, but if you are able to measure what you control, you can at least narrow the problem down.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a monitoring specialist, I see this as an interesting problem. I would suspect that the issue is not so much throughput as latency. Some simple tests would tell you, assuming ICMP is enabled:<br />
I would start with traceroute through the link, looking at the latency of the various carriers. I&#8217;m a fan of the command line tools, but  if you like GUIs, you might try a tool called Visualroute if you are on MS Windows (<a href="http://www.visualroute.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.visualroute.com/</a>), or Mtr on Linux/Unix (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mtr_%28My_traceroute%29" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mtr_%28My_traceroute%29</a>). As the answer above states, it will be hard to separate disk I/O from network issues with an FTP test.<br />
If you do see latency or packet loss with ICMP in a link, you can use that information to work with the carrier in question.<br />
If latency is not the problem, you can watch the end point routers for late collisions and other packet errors. We use Cacti to do this, and set up graphs and thresholds to alert us when we do see bandwidth max out, or if packet errors start to show up. Errors that show up in these graphs speak to router overload and line quality issues.<br />
If you have control of your end point routers, you might also use Cacti to look at the CPU and memory utilization on them, and make sure they are adequate for the job. Of course, it&#8217;s unlikely that you will get that kind of data from the intermediate routers, as they are managed by the carriers, but if you are able to measure what you control, you can at least narrow the problem down.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 3/10 queries in 0.043 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 281/287 objects using memcached

Served from: itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com @ 2013-06-20 01:58:01 -->