Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!PURDUE.EDU!narten
From: narten@PURDUE.EDU (Thomas Narten)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: [Phil Dykstra: more interesting numbers]
Message-ID: <8804150231.AA06505@percival.cs.purdue.edu>
Date: 15 Apr 88 02:31:40 GMT
References: <8804141331.AA26637@gateway.mitre.org>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 30

> Almost half the core traffic seems to be routing updates.

How true is that statement? The stats I have seen come from core
gateways. Hardly a representative sample. Ignoring mailbridge traffic,
one expects "real" traffic to go to and from "hosts", where hosts are
non-core gateways to LANs, NSFnet, etc.  An interesting statistic is
last week's traffic stats for the purdue LSI-11 EGP core server:

GWY         RCVD           RCVD     IP       % IP         DEST   % DST
NAME        DGRAMS         BYTES    ERRORS  ERRORS       UNRCH   UNRCH
PURDUE   7,184,830 1,097,986,642       101   0.00%      27,954   0.39%

GWY         SENT           SENT    DROPPED    % DROPPED
NAME        DGRAMS         BYTES   DGRAMS        DGRAMS
PURDUE   7,557,696 1,424,771,755    24,090        0.32%

That's an average of 11.9 and 12.5 pps respectively. The funny thing
is, Purdue directs all its traffic out through its Butterfly gateway;
the only Purdue traffic traveling through the LSI-11 would be
misrouted packets.

If we assume that an EGP connection exchanges one hello/I-H-U packet
every 60 seconds, and one fragmented and one unfragmented NR update in
place of a hello/I-H-U every 180 seconds, one expects 9 EGP packets
every 180 seconds, 4 to the LSI, 5 from it. In addition, if we (over)
estimate the number of EGP peers the 11 maintains at 260, egp traffic
accounts for 260*(4/180) = 5.8 pps RCVD, 260*(5/180) = 7.2 pps SENT.
Certainly GGP doesn't consume the remaining 5 pps.  Who is responsible
for the remaining traffic?

Thomas Narten