Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!ucsd!ucbvax!BBN.COM!tmallory
From: tmallory@BBN.COM
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: TCP/IP/Ethernet Protocol Analyser - which to buy
Message-ID: <9008161752.AA07515@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Date: 16 Aug 90 14:13:58 GMT
References: <64884@yarra.oz.au>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 43

Chrys,

When we looked at ethernet analyzers a few years ago, the Sniffer was clearly
the best of the portables, primarily because of its user interface and the
fact that it worked.  We did not select it because our own requirements were
more oriented towards performance testing, and the best product in that area
is the HP Lanalyzer(which is transportable :-).  I will give you a brief
picture of the Lanalyzer:

The HP is the ONLY analyzer that can keep up, 100%, with anything being
transmitted up to the maximum capacity of the wire, in real-time.  It can tell
you if that the average traffic is 10,373 pps: most others top out around 3000
pps.

The HP's buffer for storing packets is average: like all(most?) of them, it
will store back-to-back packets until the buffer is filled.

The HP's transmitter and receiver are essentially independent.

The HP has support for 16 full-size, fully specified packets for transmission.  
   Most other analyzers only allow 1 packet for transmission, and many do not
   allow you to specify the full contents of the packet(I think one allows
   more packets, but not fully specifed=zero padded).

The maximum packet transmission rate is about 10k packets per second, which is
slightly lower than the Excelan product, but respectable.  It will tell you
exactly what the traffic rate is while transmitting at this rate.  The Excelan
product was very difficult to use(and I think could only send a single, not
fully specified, packet at high speed).

You can write simple programs with loops, received packet matching, counters,
timers, and sending of the predefined test packets.

The packet decoding on the HP is an extra package.  You should look at a
current version to see if it suits your needs.

The packet filtering is pretty good, though not quite as general as some of the
others(though I think it can look at ANY byte in the packet).

If your operation gets large enough, a Sniffer and an HP make a good
combination.

Tracy