Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

perfsonar-user - Re: [perfsonar-user] I need your advice: basic use of perfSONAR

Subject: perfSONAR User Q&A and Other Discussion

List archive

Re: [perfsonar-user] I need your advice: basic use of perfSONAR


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Roberto Carna <>
  • To:
  • Subject: Re: [perfsonar-user] I need your advice: basic use of perfSONAR
  • Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2018 12:27:27 -0300
  • Ironport-phdr: 9a23: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

Dear Eli, thank you very much for your time and explanation.

Please just a new short question: I was viewing some perfSONAR network
diagrams and I could see the perfSONAR servers is always located
behind the border router and in front of the corporative firewall.
This is your recommendation or can I put the perfSONAR server behind
the corporative firewall, sharing a given DMZ with other production
servers?

Regards !!!
El jue., 23 ago. 2018 a las 12:17, Eli Dart
(<>)
escribió:
>
> Hi Roberto,
>
> This strikes me as a situation where details are going to matter -
> potentially a lot.
>
> The L2L tunnel is presumably carrying a bunch of production traffic.....I'd
> want to be sure that I understood the bandwidth available on that tunnel
> before I did any throughput testing over it. This includes several things,
> such as the capabilities of the hardware at both ends (interface speeds,
> tunnel encapsulation/decapsulation performance, CPU vs. hardware
> implementation for tunnel encap/decap, etc), what the background traffic
> characteristics look like (is there a bunch of loss-sensitive stuff running
> over this, what does the blast radius for mistakes look like, e.g. does all
> the phone and video traffic traverse it, etc), how the L2L link is
> integrated into the rest of your infrastructure (lots of fan-in, high-speed
> router vs. cheap low-speed router, etc) and so on.
>
> One thing you might start with is a set of OWAMP boxes, one or two at each
> site depending on how your network is built. Then yes - test across the L2L
> path as well as out to SANReN from each site, and see what you can see from
> a latency/loss perspective. After that, decide how to proceed next.
>
> If this sounds overly-cautious, it might be. However, tunnels are tricky.
> You're dealing with not only the parameters of the local links and the
> local hardware you're running (including several different layers just on
> that stuff), but also everything that the provider is doing. Because you're
> in a tunnel, you can't see the characteristics of the tunnel path from
> within the tunnel - from the perspective of tests which traverse the tunnel
> all you can see is that there is one hop (the tunnel) which may or may not
> have consistent behavior and may or may not be able to handle load or
> bursts or whatever. Now, if you can engineer a perfSONAR test that runs
> outside the tunnel and traverses the same path as the tunnel, that could be
> very valuable. Then of course you'll need to figure out whether your
> testing competes with the tunnel in a way that causes performance problems
> (e.g. congestion) for the encapsulated traffic, but you'll have a way of
> comparing tests within the tunnel to tests outside the tunnel on the same
> path, which can help identify whether problems you might see exist inside
> or outside the tunnel. That can help with attribution.
>
> Anyway - definitely go forward, and definitely start running tests. I would
> just be cautious with throughput testing at first, and I would make sure I
> understood all the interactions involved before I started filling pipes.
>
> Eli
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 7:57 AM Roberto Carna
> <>
> wrote:
>>
>> Dear, I need your advice please:
>>
>> We have two corporate networks communicated between them by a L2L
>> link, and connected to Internet too.
>>
>> In order to start testing and using pefSONAR, do you think it's a good
>> idea to put one perfSONAR server in each site of our company (in a DMZ
>> behind both firewalls) in order to measure the L2L link parameters,
>> and also connect these perfSONAR servers to a SANReN perfSONAR server
>> near us ???
>>
>> Thanks a lot, regards !!!
>
>
>
> --
>
> Eli Dart, Network Engineer NOC: (510) 486-7600
> ESnet Science Engagement Group (800) 333-7638
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of Page