Mark Boolootian writes:
It looks to me as if MAE West may be congesting again. While things look
fine at the moment, earlier I was seeing congestion when transitting between
CERFNET (188.8.131.52) and ESNET (184.108.40.206).
My understanding of the topology of MAE West is that there is a Gigaswitch
at Ames and a Gigaswitch at MFS (in San Jose) connected by a pair of
OC-3 ATM circuits. My belief is that CERFNET and ESNET have ports on
different Gigaswitches. MFS has changed the web page which lists MAE West
connections such that I am unable to easily tell who is on which switch.
In looking back at stats for the OC-3 link prior to the addition of the
second circuit, I note the circuit maxes out around 70 Mbits/sec. In
discussing this around here, we concluded that data is probably clocked
out the Gigaswitch at 100 Mbits/sec and ATM overhead accounts for the
remaining loss of available bandwidth. Can anyone confirm this for me?
The graph for the OC-3 pair from yesterday indicates that it's time to
add more bandwidth between switches. I'm real interested in knowing what
plans MFS has up its sleeves for alleviating congestion this time around.
Provisioning an OC-3 and only burning half the available bandwidth doesn't
strike me as a scalable solution.
At http://ext2.mfsdatanet.com/MAE/west.map.html you will find a
connection map dated Sept 18.
I should add that CERFnet has TWO routers on Gigaswitches: one
of each side of the MAE ( NASA and MFS-San Jose).
ESNET seems to have a router on the MFS side . The CERFnet router
you mention is on the MFS-San Jose side as well. The IP address
(220.127.116.11) you refer to is the SMDS interface to the CIX on that
router. The MAE-FDDI side address of that router 18.104.22.168.
What you report seems to suggest congestion in the switch at the
MFS side ...
If you can share more information about the end to end path you
were testing, I could shed more light on it.
Pushpendra Mohta email@example.com +1 619 455 3908