perfSONAR User Q&A and Other Discussion

["Anderson, Eric L." <>]

> On Sep 28, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Stephen Fromm 
> <>
>  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 2016-09-28 at 06:28:40 -0700, Andrew Lake wrote:
> 
>> - We are dropping web100 support 6 months after 4.0 is released. This is
>> something that has been contemplated for awhile now and the fact that there
>> is no web100 patch for series 3 kernels, like that on CentOS 7, makes this
>> a good time to make that transition.
>> 
>> - We will not be including NDT on the toolkit or other perfSONAR bundles
>> anymore since it requires web100. We do not make this decision lightly, but
>> our user surveys the past few years and discussions with many in the
>> community seem to indicate that NDT is not a primary driver in using
>> perfSONAR and the support burden coupled with the burden of requiring a
>> non-standard kernel outweighs the benefit in the perfSOANR context. This is
>> not to say it doesn't have utility in other contexts. NDT has a loyal
>> following so it is possible it will live-on in other venues such as M-LAB,
>> but not directly as part of perfSONAR.
> 
> We have found NDT to be an important part of perfSONAR and a great
> resource in assisting end-users identify issues between their client
> computers and test points across a network.  This often helps identify
> issues where it isn't feasible to deploy a perfSONAR node deep inside a
> customer network.
> 
> Do the perfSONAR developers or other NDT users have suggestions on
> alternatives to use?


Same concern and similar question here as well. Although Flash based, one 
option might be OOKLA speedtest. Does anyone have experience hosting the 
OOKLA speedtest 
(http://www.ookla.com/support/a22030676/Speedtest-Installation)?

Thanks  
--
Eric Anderson
Systems Administration Group
Missouri Research and Education Network

(573) 882-0414