AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20071018100047.5b260b95@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<brian.stark@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@onstor-exch02.onstor.net/INBOX	0	BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0619AE23@onstor-exch02.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:01:20 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: "Brian Stark" <brian.stark@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
Message-ID: <20071018100120.71d96735@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0619AE23@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E05DD73DC@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E068BA5@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E05BFE50A@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E068BA6@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0619AE23@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Heh.  Simultaneous emails.

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 09:55:18 -0700 "Brian Stark"
<brian.stark@onstor.com> wrote:

> Looks like our link between Pleasanton and Campbell is nearly
> saturated right now on the outbound side:
>  
> http://mrtg/mrtg/hp5308A/10.0.0.19_8.html
>  
> This is affecting several people right now.  Is this related to the
> DMIP testing?
>  
>  
> Brian
>  
>  
>  
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> 	From: Brian Baker 
> 	Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 11:44 PM
> 	To: Paul Hammer; Andy Sharp
> 	Cc: Sandrine Boulanger; Brian Stark; Raj Kumar; John Rogers;
> Joshua Goldenhar
> 	Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	
> 	
> 	It would be interesting to see how a WAN link compression
> device would handle the traffic. In the early days I used a Peribit
> appliance and it worked well with common traffic. NFS CIFS, FTP, SMTP
> even SQL. It did not speak off the wall protocols and I wonder if it
> could comprende DMIP enough to compress it. The 25k it would cost to
> get them could easily be used to replace ONStor's entire core switch
> infrastructure. Corporate never gets the toys :(
> 	
> 	 
> 	Rockies! SWEEP!
> 	 
> 	Brian
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> 	From: Paul Hammer
> 	Sent: Thu 10/4/2007 11:29 PM
> 	To: Brian Baker; Andy Sharp
> 	Cc: Sandrine Boulanger; Brian Stark; Raj Kumar; John Rogers;
> Joshua Goldenhar
> 	Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	
> 	
> 	Thanks Brian. The link saturatutaion was pure ignorance on our
> behalf, had no idea that DMIP would saturate the link to the point of
> hobbling productivity for the P'town team, this goes for both QA and
> Corporate, perhaps this is why Kevin never put the MD boxes in P'town
> 7 months ago as requested by Frank. 
> 	 
> 	Great point on the testing. Sandrine and John can you propose
> how we setup the DMIP feature for testing in Soak? I am okay with all
> of the suggestions that Brian listed. Thanks Brain, we did not know
> what impact this would have on the link for this test nor for MD. Now
> I understand a lot more about it. Thanks. 
> 	 
> 	John, Raj  and Sandrine lets work out what makes sense for SS
> and for MD with the link capacity in mind. Still curious though on the
> RiverBed angle.
> 	 
> 	Thanks Brian.  
> 	 
> 	Go Rockies!! 2 Down and 1 to Go! 
> 	 
> 	-Paul
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> 	From: Brian Baker
> 	Sent: Thu 10/4/2007 11:16 PM
> 	To: Paul Hammer; Andy Sharp
> 	Cc: Sandrine Boulanger; Brian Stark; Raj Kumar; John Rogers;
> Joshua Goldenhar
> 	Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	
> 	
> 	Paul,
> 	We already have layer 3/4 switches that support QoS . If DMIP
> generates this traffic then I will address it. I would use a method,
> per-port ingress-based enforcement bandwidth maximums. I'm assuming we
> won't have these spikes via DMIP for Mightydog as the baselines will
> be done here. No new network equipment needed no need to break out the
> checkbook.
> 	I think we need to revisit the testing that is done across the
> Pleasanton link. Why couldn't this testing be done with a DSL, cable
> line or t1 line that is hooked into the lab? This would give you the
> ability to test with different network equipment in front of your wan
> interfaces. John Rogers also mentioned that he was working on
> acquiring software to mimic wan speeds. I think this is the direction
> you need to take opposed to getting a additional line in Pleasanton.
> There shouldn't be a need for the geographic disparity, you just need
> the hops and latency to make it look like you aren't in the same room.
> 	DMIP will be considered general productivity traffic for this
> link and I will take it into account as I measure network traffic. Our
> problem in this instance was not understanding the impact of this
> test. I could have easily been someone downloading 1000's of torrents
> or 30GB of CIFS copies.
> 	If you give me some warning when utilizing corporate
> resources I can accommodate some traffic shaping. I only need some
> time to implement the solution and forewarning in the future.
> 	 
> 	Brian
> 	 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> 	From: Paul Hammer
> 	Sent: Thu 10/4/2007 7:06 PM
> 	To: Andy Sharp
> 	Cc: Brian Baker; Sandrine Boulanger; Brian Stark; Raj Kumar;
> John Rogers; Joshua Goldenhar
> 	Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	
> 	
> 
> 	Hey Andy,
> 	
> 	Agree.
> 	
> 	We need to plan accordingly for the MightyDog corporate DMIP
> session's that we plan to start soon.
> 	
> 	Looks like we should have a rigid nightly sessions scheduled
> (so we have predicable perf hit). Else we need a bigger or different
> pipe/approach in place. A router may be the way to go, also interested
> in how a Riverbed deployment may be able to help us here. Added Josh
> for his perspective on this point.
> 	
> 	Bottom line is we cannot negatively impact the Cougar schedule
> or our general productivity on this link with DMIP, so the solution
> has to take into account QoS as part of the solution.
> 	
> 	Thanks,
> 	
> 	-Paul
> 	
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From: Andy Sharp
> 	Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 6:14 PM
> 	To: Paul Hammer
> 	Cc: Brian Baker; Sandrine Boulanger; Brian Stark; Raj Kumar
> 	Subject: Re: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	
> 	The problem here, and the reason for this disconnect is that,
> IIUC, we
> 	are using a production asset for QA testing purposes.  I think
> this
> 	kind of testing is great -- but should we provision a separate
> link for
> 	it?  Or use a router that is capable of doing QoS itself to
> throttle
> 	back the DMIP traffic?
> 	
> 	Having the line swamped between 8pm and 6am will still affect
> me greatly, sorry to say.
> 	
> 	Cheers,
> 	
> 	a
> 	
> 	
> 	On Thu, 4 Oct 2007 17:44:45 -0700 "Paul Hammer"
> 	<paul.hammer@onstor.com> wrote:
> 	
> 	> Kind of funny, most folks want this thing to go way faster.
> 	> I understand why you would like slower.
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> ________________________________
> 	>
> 	> From: Brian Baker
> 	> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 3:59 PM
> 	> To: Sandrine Boulanger; Paul Hammer; Andy Sharp; Brian Stark
> 	> Cc: Raj Kumar
> 	> Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Sandrine,
> 	>
> 	> As you can see by the mrtg graph traffic has gone back down.
> As a
> 	> feature request to DMIP I would like to see bandwidth
> throttling on
> 	> the filer side.
> 	>
> 	> http://mrtg/mrtg/hp5308A/10.0.0.19_8.html
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> From: Sandrine Boulanger
> 	> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 3:50 PM
> 	> To: Paul Hammer; Brian Baker; Andy Sharp; Brian Stark
> 	> Cc: Raj Kumar
> 	> Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Is it better now?
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> I changed the schedules to run between 22 and 6am.
> 	>
> 	> I paused a mirror that was already at 66%, we can resume it
> tonight.
> 	>
> 	> I have an issue with one mirror for which I cannot modify
> 	> the
> schedule
> 	> even if I do it from the GW that owns the vsvr. Mirror show
> NAME finds
> 	> the mirror but mirror schedule NAME does not...
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Welcome to the ONStor NAS Gateway.
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> g2r5> vsvr show
> 	>
> 	> Virtual servers on nas gateway g2r5
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	>  ID  State                             Name
> 	>
> 	> ====================================================
> 	>
> 	> 1    Enabled                           VS_MGMT_588
> 	>
> 	> 9    Enabled                           G2R5-VS1
> 	>
> 	> 10   Enabled                           G2R5-VS2
> 	>
> 	> 11   Enabled                           G2R5-VS3
> 	>
> 	> 12   Enabled                           G2R5-VS4
> 	>
> 	> 13   Enabled                           GNSSRVR
> 	>
> 	> 18   Enabled                           G2R5-VS5
> 	>
> 	> 19   Enabled                           G2R5-VS6
> 	>
> 	> g2r5> vsvr set G2R5-VS3
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3> mirror show
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	>    Mirror Name    AdminState  Oper  State  Transferred
> Source
> 	> Volume           Target Volume       VirtualServer
> 	>
> 	> ----------------  ----------  -----------  -----------
> 	> ----------------------  ----------------------
> 	> -------------
> 	>
> 	>   g2r5-v1v2-dmip     Enabled         Idle           0%
> 	> g2r5-vs1-vol2  g2r5-vs1-vol2@10.11.1.30       G2R5-VS1
> 	>
> 	>   g2r5-v2v1-dmip     Enabled         Idle           0%
> 	> g2r5-vs2-vol1  g2r5-vs2-vol1-dmip@10.11.1.30       G2R5-VS2
> 	>
> 	>   g2r5-v3v1-dmip     Enabled         Idle           0%
> 	> g2r5-vs3-vol1  g2r5-vs3-vol1-dmip@10.11.1.40       G2R5-VS3
> 	>
> 	>  g2r5vs5-vol1-m1     Enabled         Idle         100%
> 	> g2r5-vs5-vol1        g2r5-vs5-vol1-m1       G2R5-VS5
> 	>
> 	>  g2r5vs4-vol1-m1     Enabled         Idle           0%
> 	> g2r5-vs4-vol1         g2r5vs4-vol1-m1       G2R5-VS4
> 	>
> 	>  g2r5vs4-vol5-m1     Enabled         Idle         100%
> 	> g2r5-vs4-vol5         g2r5vs4-vol5-m1       G2R5-VS4
> 	>
> 	>   g4r8-v2v1-dmip     Enabled         Idle         100%
> 	> g4r8-vs2-vol1  g4r8-vs2-vol1-dmip@10.11.1.36       G4R8-VS2
> 	>
> 	>  g12r9-v1v1-dmip     Enabled       Paused          66%
> 	> g12r9-vs1-vol1  g12r9-vs1-vol1@10.11.1.36      G12R9-VS1
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3>
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3>
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3> mirror schedule g2r5-v3v1-dmip -h 0
> 	>
> 	>  /
> 	>
> 	> Error: Mirror[g2r5-v3v1-dmip] not found.
> 	>
> 	> % Command failure.
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3> elog show log 20
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:16 g2r5 : 1:3:efs:INFO: 16516: FS:
> g2r5-vs5-vol1-m1
> 	> 0x24c000000dd - amDeltaInstallCommit - snp - snap resume:
> recal
> 	> refbyte snapcounts for 1
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:16 g2r5 : 1:2:efs:INFO: 16517: FS:
> g2r5-vs5-vol1-m1
> 	> 0x24c000000dd - amDeltaInstallCommit - snp - snap resume:
> recal
> 	> refbyte snapcounts for 2
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:16 g2r5 : 1:3:efs:INFO: 16518: FS:
> g2r5-vs5-vol1-m1
> 	> 0x24c000000dd - amDeltaInstallCommit - snp - snap resume:
> recal
> 	> refbyte snapcounts for 3
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:19 g2r5 : 1:2:efs:INFO: 16519: FS:
> g2r5-vs5-vol1-m1
> 	> 0x24c000000dd - amDeltaInstallCommit - snp - snap revert
> mirror 3: end
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:19 g2r5 : 1:3:efs:INFO: 16520: FS:
> g2r5-vs5-vol1-m1
> 	> 0x24c000000dd - amDeltaInstallCommit - mirror - FS AM
> 	> TARGET:
> install
> 	> commit reverted to snap 3 genNum 70 ( )
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:19 g2r5 : 1:3:efs:INFO: 16521: FS:
> 	> g2r5-vs5-vol1 0x24c000000d9 - amDeltaComplete - mirror - FS
> 	> AM: removing old
> unused
> 	> snapshot SANM_SS_g2r5vs5-vol1-m1_0000024c000000d9_0000019f 1
> gen 70
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:19 g2r5 : 1:2:efs:NOTICE: 16522: FS:
> g2r5-vs5-vol1
> 	> 0x24c000000d9 - amDeltaComplete - snp - snapnum 1 un pinned
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:22 g2r5 : 1:3:efs:NOTICE: 16523: FS:
> g2r5-vs5-vol1
> 	> 0x24c000000d9 - amDeltaComplete - snp - snap remove complete
> for
> 	> SANM_SS_g2r5vs5-vol1-m1_0000024c000000d9_0000019f id 1
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:22 g2r5 : 1:2:efs:INFO: 16524: FS:
> 	> g2r5-vs5-vol1 0x24c000000d9 - amDeltaComplete - mirror - FS
> 	> AM: delta
> complete
> 	> session
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:22 g2r5 : 0:0:sanm:NOTICE: Session terminated
> 	> successfully for mirror[g2r5vs5-vol1-m1]
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:35:25 g2r5 : 0:0:sanm:NOTICE: SANM: Mirror
> Completed:
> 	> g2r5vs5-vol1-m1
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:36:13 g2r5 : 0:0:sanm:NOTICE:
> sanm_procRemoteModifyRsp:
> 	> Error: Mirror[g2r5-v3v1-dmip] not found.
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:36:13 g2r5 : 0:0:sanm:NOTICE:
> sanm_procRemoteModifyRsp:
> 	> remote modify failed, rc[-6654]
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:36:46 g2r5 : 0:0:ssh:INFO: 'admin' logged in
> 	> through
> remote
> 	> host(10.0.0.79)
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:36:49 g2r5 : 0:0:nfxsh:NOTICE: cmd[0]: vsvr show :
> status[0]
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:36:54 g2r5 : 0:0:nfxsh:NOTICE: cmd[1]: vsvr set
> G2R5-VS3 :
> 	> status[0]
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:36:59 g2r5 : 0:0:nfxsh:NOTICE: cmd[2]: mirror show
> :
> 	> status[0]
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:37:24 g2r5 : 0:0:sanm:NOTICE:
> sanm_procRemoteModifyRsp:
> 	> Error: Mirror[g2r5-v3v1-dmip] not found.
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:37:24 g2r5 : 0:0:sanm:NOTICE:
> sanm_procRemoteModifyRsp:
> 	> remote modify failed, rc[-6654]
> 	>
> 	> Oct  4 15:37:24 g2r5 : 0:0:nfxsh:NOTICE: cmd[3]: mirror
> schedule
> 	> g2r5-v3v1-dmip -h 0 : status[11]
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3>
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3> mirror show g2r5-v3v1-dmip
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Mirror Name             : g2r5-v3v1-dmip
> 	>
> 	> Admin State             : Enabled
> 	>
> 	> Operational State       : Idle
> 	>
> 	> Mirror Load             : MED
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Source Vol Name         : g2r5-vs3-vol1
> 	>
> 	> Source Vol Id           : 0x24c00000080
> 	>
> 	> Mirror Vol Name         : g2r5-vs3-vol1-dmip@10.11.1.40
> 	>
> 	> Mirror Vol Id           : 0x4100000006b
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Mirror Secondary Node Name : None
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Mirror Schedule :
> 	>
> 	> -----------------
> 	>
> 	>    Minute       : *
> 	>
> 	>    Hour         : 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
> 	>
> 	>    Day Of Month : *
> 	>
> 	>    Month        : *
> 	>
> 	>    Day Of Week  : *
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Counters:
> 	>
> 	> ---------
> 	>
> 	>    Mirror Start Count    : 0
> 	>
> 	>    Mirror Complete Count : 0
> 	>
> 	>    Mirror Abort Count    : 0
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Last Mirror Session Information:
> 	>
> 	> --------------------------------
> 	>
> 	>    Mirror Started     :
> 	>
> 	>    Mirror Finished    :
> 	>
> 	>    Bytes Transferred  : 0 (MB)
> 	>
> 	>    Percent Transferred: 0%
> 	>
> 	>    Throughput         : 0 (bytes/s)
> 	>
> 	>    Snapshot Name      :
> 	> SANM_SS_g2r5-v3v1-dmip_0000024c00000080_0000109b
> 	>
> 	>    Session Status     :
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> g2r5 G2R5-VS3>
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> -----Original Message-----
> 	> From: Paul Hammer
> 	> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 3:13 PM
> 	> To: Brian Baker; Andy Sharp; Brian Stark
> 	> Cc: Raj Kumar; Sandrine Boulanger
> 	> Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Sandrine do you know?
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> -----Original Message-----
> 	>
> 	> From: Brian Baker
> 	>
> 	> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 3:05 PM
> 	>
> 	> To: Andy Sharp; Brian Stark
> 	>
> 	> Cc: Raj Kumar; Paul Hammer; Sandrine Boulanger
> 	>
> 	> Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Raj,
> 	>
> 	> It appears that the dmip mirros are still going. Can you
> 	> stop
> these
> 	> immediately? Let me know if you believe you have stopped
> 	> your
> mirror,
> 	> if so I will find the culprit.
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> -----Original Message-----
> 	>
> 	> From: Andy Sharp
> 	>
> 	> Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2007 3:02 PM
> 	>
> 	> To: Brian Stark
> 	>
> 	> Cc: Brian Baker
> 	>
> 	> Subject: Re: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> I'm not sure where this got left off, but does this mean we
> know what
> 	>
> 	> the traffic is?  Can we try pulling the plug on that IP
> address?
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> Thanks,
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> a
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 18:04:22 -0700 "Brian Stark"
> 	>
> 	> <brian.stark@onstor.com> wrote:
> 	>
> 	> 
> 	>
> 	> > I'll go unplug the array that's spinning like crazy back
> there...
> 	>
> 	> > 
> 	>
> 	> >
> 	>
> 	> > > -----Original Message-----
> 	>
> 	> > > From: Andy Sharp
> 	>
> 	> > > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 5:48 PM
> 	>
> 	> > > To: Brian Baker
> 	>
> 	> > > Cc: Brian Stark
> 	>
> 	> > > Subject: Re: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> > >
> 	>
> 	> > > I'm all for blocking it and seeing {what happens,who
> 	>
> 	> > > squeals}.  Who's with me?
> 	>
> 	> > >
> 	>
> 	> > > I can't see the included link because I'm remote and I
> can't
> 	>
> 	> > > get an ssh proxy to work <hangs his head in shame>.
> 	>
> 	> > >
> 	>
> 	> > > a
> 	>
> 	> > >
> 	>
> 	> > >
> 	>
> 	> > > On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 17:18:33 -0700 "Brian Baker"
> 	>
> 	> > > <brian.baker@onstor.com> wrote:
> 	>
> 	> > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > Someone is hogging the connection up there. Take a
> 	> > > > look
> at MRTG.
> 	>
> 	> > > > http://mrtg/mrtg/hp5308A/10.0.0.19_8.html
> 	>
> 	> > > > This is the Pleasanton uplink.
> 	>
> 	> > > > We can ask who has been whoring the connection and ask
> them to
> 	>
> 	> > > > stop. Or I can look into it further and block their
> traffic.
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > -----Original Message-----
> 	>
> 	> > > > From: Brian Baker
> 	>
> 	> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 4:55 PM
> 	>
> 	> > > > To: Andy Sharp; Brian Stark
> 	>
> 	> > > > Subject: RE: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > Andy,
> 	>
> 	> > > > Thx for reporting this. Kevin was up there last week
> 	> > > > and
> he
> 	>
> 	> > > reported
> 	>
> 	> > > > the issue was resolved. I will take a look into this.
> But
> 	>
> 	> > > as you know
> 	>
> 	> > > > I'm very blah so I probably won't be able to look at
> 	> > > > it
> until
> 	>
> 	> > > > blah.
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > -----Original Message-----
> 	>
> 	> > > > From: Andy Sharp
> 	>
> 	> > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 4:17 PM
> 	>
> 	> > > > To: Brian Stark
> 	>
> 	> > > > Cc: Brian Baker
> 	>
> 	> > > > Subject: networking betwixt camphell and pleztown
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > I'm sure everyone knows by now, but I just thought I
> would put
> 	> > > > my
> 	>
> 	> > > > notice in just in case.
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > Networking between Campbell and Pleasanton has slowed
> 	> > > > to
> a
> 	>
> 	> > > crawl, and
> 	>
> 	> > > > it's impacting my work, as well as others, I'm
> 	> > > > guessing,
> pretty
> 	>
> 	> > > > significantly.
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > Transfering a kernel to 10.1.1.189 goes at about
> 	> > > > 100-160
> 	>
> 	> > > KiB/s, down
> 	>
> 	> > > > from 6-700 KiB yesterday.  It takes my cougar about 10
> 	>
> 	> > > minutes to boot
> 	>
> 	> > > > just to single user mode (NFS root is located in
> campbell),
> 	>
> 	> > > and that
> 	>
> 	> > > > means about 4-5 reboots an hour, when really I need
> about 12-15
> 	>
> 	> > > > reboots an hour.
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > I know everyone has a lot to do and blah-blah, but I
> didn't want
> 	>
> 	> > > > to keep it a secret either.
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > Cheers,
> 	>
> 	> > > >
> 	>
> 	> > > > a
> 	>
> 	> > >
> 	>
> 	
> 
