20 Jan
2016
20 Jan
'16
11:29 p.m.
Since Bob suggested using ping times, and I actually think that is a
pretty reasonable idea, I sortof have mapped costs this way now.
0-40ms = 1
40-80ms = 2
80-120ms = 3
120-160ms = 4
160-200ms = 5
I do do some rounding of times and values down when close to a lower value.
But this is a suggestion that would maybe give us a somewhat coherent
cost scale for HECnet.
And for most people, this is mostly relevant for area routing. What you
then use for cost calculations inside your area do not at any time
affect anyone outside your area.
Johnny
On 2016-01-20 20:14, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 2016-01-20 19:38, Steve Davidson wrote:
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
SG1 to MIM is a consistent 130ms.
Thanks. So my idea on 1-2 for some Europe-links, 3 to the east coast,
and 5 to the west seems to also map rather well with the ping times...
And to make it clear, my links so far as the ethernet, which I mentioned
before, I have a rather high level two routing cost on, and one link
each to Bob, Steve and Rok.
Or, to show it as my tool does:
.mnc list
Circuit State Cost Proto Port Remote destination
IP-0-0 On 5/5 UDP 700 108-65-195-50.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcg:700
IP-0-1 On 3/3 UDP 700 eagle.hecnet.org:700
IP-0-2 On 2/2 UDP 700 193.2.191.212:700
IP-0-3 Off 1/1 Unknown 700 Default:0
IP-0-4 Off 1/1 Unknown 700 Default:0
IP-0-5 Off 1/1 Unknown 700 Default:0
IP-0-6 Off 1/1 Unknown 700 Default:0
IP-0-7 Off 1/1 Unknown 700 Default:0
.
But, this is as the world looks at from MIM. Others need to figure out
what makes sense for them, but this can at least give some suggestions
on costs.
Johnny
-Steve
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 20, 2016, at 10:30, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-01-20 18:27, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>> On 2016-01-20 18:24, Robert Armstrong wrote:
>>>> However, decnet.jfcl.com do not respond to pings... :-(
>>>
>>> Sorry, configuration error. Try again.
>>
>> Great. A very steady 200ms from MIM (resulution is only 20ms on the
>> machine).
>>
>> Now, if we can have a couple of others, to form some idea of a good
>> basis for costs...
>
> One more datapoint: Me in switzerland to MIM is about 60ms.
>
> Johnny
>
> --
> Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
> || on a psychedelic trip
> email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
> pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol