[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [wide-netman:00884] Re: Call for censensus on path forward

[ post by non-subscriber.  with the massive amount of spam, it is easy to
  miss and therefore delete mis-posts.  so fix subscription addresses! ]

Hello folks,

We are monitoring a small IPv6 network running on the Japan
Gigabit Network and connecting 6 prefectures. The network is
still in its early stages so there is not so much application
traffic. The major traffic is neighbour discovery and routing
traffic. I monitor this network online using a passive probes.

 As you know, IPv6 generates a periodic traffic for
Neighbors-Detection. My monitor polls a passive probe for
the count of these "Neighbour-Detection" packets.
I monitor these periodic waves for detecting the faults in
this IPv6 network.

 In this work, large interval of polling is not good. The
correct pattern of the Neighbour Discovery traffic can be
identified only with small polling intervals.


--KOIDE Kazuhide
Research Institute of Electrical Communication, Tohoku Univ.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: "Glenn Mansfield Keeni" <glenn@cysols.com>; <eos@ops.ietf.org>
Cc: <wide-netman@cysols.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2002 9:00 PM
Subject: [wide-netman:00884] Re: Call for censensus on path forward

> 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?