perfSONAR User Q&A and Other Discussion

[Hyojoon Kim <>]

Hello, 

Andrew, thanks so much for the info! This is really helpful. 

Amit, we will let you know how things go when we use the tagged interfaces. Thanks!

Regards,

Joon

On Aug 12, 2015, at 3:39 PM, Andrew Lake <> wrote:

Hi,

BWCTL only allows one throughput test at a time regardless of which interface each test is running on, so you should be fine. 

Hope that helps,

Andy

On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Christopher J. Tengi <> wrote:

Andy,
Our concern, based on my limited perfSONAR knowledge, is that eth0.1001 and eth0.1027 might both be used at the same time, and that this could skew results. My assumption is that a single interface, such as eth1, would only be used for 1 test at a time. If eth0.1001 and eth0.1027 are considered distinct interfaces, rather than 2 views of the same interface, would that be an issue?

Thanks,
/Chris


> On Aug 12, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Andrew Lake <> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Yes, it should be treated like any other interface name. On ESnet, all our BWCTL hosts run their tests on a tagged interface without issue.
>
> Thanks,
> Andy
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 2:53 PM, Hyojoon Kim <> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a question about how perfsonar toolkit deals with interfaces with VLAN tags configured. In a Linux machine, you can configure an interface to have one or more VLAN tags. This will produce interfaces something like “eth0.1001”.
>
> Can the perfsonar toolkit recognize and use these virtual interfaces correctly and deal with them correctly for measurements?
>
> Thanks,
> Joon
>
>
>
>