RE: Call for censensus on path forward

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

I would really like to hear from a few operators (or
even NM application developers) if they indeed find it
a requirement to do polling a 1-second-granularty.
It does not sound realistic to me... but who is me?

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glenn Mansfield Keeni [mailto:glenn@cysols.com]
> Sent: zaterdag 21 september 2002 13:19
> To: eos@ops.ietf.org
> Cc: wide-netman@cysols.com
> Subject: Re: Call for censensus on path forward
> 
.. snip ..

> But then why do we need to look at traffic at 1 second intervals?
> If we are managing a reasonably fast network, and doing serious
> management - then we probably need to look at traffic at even
> smaller intervals. I will cite just two of the instances that we
> have actually encountered.
> a. Traffic graphs for a Gigabit network polled at, say, 1 minute
>     intervals are USELESS. What we end up seeing is the traffic
>     averaged over a minute! One never sees that real traffic
>     characteristics from these graphs. [Isn't there anyone out there
>     monitoring a high speed network ? I would be interested to know
>     how you do it.]
> b. Our security applications need high resolution traffic monitoring.
>     There can be a sustained stealth DoS attack that is disrupting the
>     network and seriously degrading its performance (with short and
>     sharp bursts traffic) yet not a flicker shows on the 
> traffic graphs
>     to tell about the attack i.e. if you are monitoring at 5 minutes,
>     1 minute or even several second intervals!
> 
> I would love to hear your comments.
> 
> Glenn
> 
> 
> 
>