Title: | DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT. |
Notice: | Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187 |
Moderator: | TAEC::BEROUD |
Created: | Mon Aug 21 1989 |
Last Modified: | Wed Jun 04 1997 |
Last Successful Update: | Fri Jun 06 1997 |
Number of topics: | 6497 |
Total number of notes: | 27359 |
A search of the PA and Node4 documentation produced not explaination of what the statisitic 'Ethernet Contention' is for a node4 line. BMS V1.2. MCC> sh node4 keroon line sva-0 all statis Node4 keroon Line sva-0 AT 25-JAN-1993 10:04:19 Statistics Examination of Attributes shows: Duration = 59 Seconds Outbound Utilization = 0 Percent Inbound Utilization = 0.25 Percent Average Outbound Block Size = 65.5 Bytes/Block Average Inbound Block Size = 96.86 Bytes/Block Outbound Block Rate = 7.000000E-02 Blocks/Sec Inbound Block Rate = 25.39 Blocks/Sec Deferred Percent = 0 Single Collision Percent = 0 Multiple Collision Percent = 0 Inbound Multicast Percent = 100 Error Percent = 0 Count of Data Overrun Blocks = 0 Count of System Buffers Unavailable = 0 Count of User Buffers Unavailable = 0 Count of Collision Detect Failures = 0 Count of Unrecognized Frame Destination = 0 Count of Frame Send Failures = 0 Count of Frame Receive Failures = 0 Ethernet Contention = 0 Percent <<<<<<<<< Outbound Bytes = 262 Bytes Inbound Bytes = 145092 Bytes Outbound Data Blocks = 4 Blocks Inbound Data Blocks = 1498 Blocks Any Takers? Thanks, Steve Woestemeyer CSC/CS - Network Support Group
T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
4437.1 | Memories of NMCC/DM | BIKINI::KRAUSE | European NewProductEngineer for MCC | Tue Jan 26 1993 10:57 | 31 |
>A search of the PA and Node4 documentation produced not explaination of >what the statisitic 'Ethernet Contention' is for a node4 line. BMS V1.2. This one obviously belongs to the formula chapter of the PA doc, but isn't there (any doc writers listening?). 'Ethernet Contention' sounds familiar to me ... and the voice spoke: "N M C C / D E C n e t M o n i t o r" ;-) Ethernet_Contention = ( bsid + bssc + bsmc ) / dbs bsid = Blocks Sent Initially Deferred bssc = Blocks Sent Single Collision bsmc = Blocks Sent Multiple Collision dbs = Data Blocks Sent Since the statistics provided by PA are very similar to what NMCC/DM gave us, I assume that they 'recycled' the formulas (and made the same mistakes...). PA says Percent so most likely it's * 100. 'Ethernet Contention' is a relational value with no unit that gives an estimate of how busy the Ethernet is, in the view of this line. A high value means that the line had to wait/retry a lot before it could successfully send a block. This could be due to heavy traffic or high collision rates. A low value means that the line most of the time saw a free Ethernet when it wanted to transmit. *Robert (who guessed quite a few performance figures from NMCC/DM reports :-) | |||||
4437.2 | QAR#465 - MCC013_INT | MOLAR::CHRISB::BRIENEN | Network Management Applications! | Wed Jan 27 1993 17:30 | 11 |
Hi Steve, Thanks for finding this "oversight" in the Use Book (it DID make it into the PA MRM, but not many people read those!). I've filed a low priority QAR against PA. Chris P.S. Thanks Richard for the description in .1 ! | |||||
4437.3 | Math Reuse | BLUMON::SYLOR | Architect = Buzzword Generator | Mon Feb 01 1993 22:38 | 18 |
Ah yes, old formulas never die ... I don't know for sure what PA does, but I'll bet you've got the formula (and its lineage) right. For what it's worth, I theorized that the ethernet contention is about equal to the utilization (overall actual utilization of the ether). If a line is sending packets at random, and in sufficient volume to form a valid statistical sample, then the probablitity the packet can't be sent immediately equals the utilization of the cable. Little's Law of queueing theory. The packets that don't get sent immediately are either "initially deferred", or suffer a collision. Hence the formula. Unfortunately, I never got around to testing that theory against practice.... If anyone ever tested the idea, I'd like to hear. Mark |