RE: [RMONMIB] comments on draft-ietf-rmonmib-dsmon-mib-02.txt

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Comment inline

> ----------
> From: 	Carter Bullard[SMTP:carter@qosient.com]
> Reply To: 	carter@qosient.com
> Sent: 	Wednesday, October 04, 2000 12:29 AM
> To: 	'Dan Romascanu'; rmonmib@ietf.org; mibs@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: 	RE: [RMONMIB] comments on
> draft-ietf-rmonmib-dsmon-mib-02.txt
> 
> Hey Dan, 
> Hmmmmm, I remember when ethernet was really fast. 
> Actually I remember when 2400 baud was fast :o) 
> 
> I can buy a 2 Tbps fiber link, supporting IP, today. 
> And that number should be around 40 - 100 Tbps by 
> Q3-Q4 next year.  
> 
> At 100 Tbps, a 64 bit counter will roll over 
> in 2.1350398 days.  Do 50 hour turnover times 
> justify rollover counters?  I think so. 
> 
I am not going to speculate if/when we would need more than 64 bit
counters, but 50 hour turnover is not a reason for rollover. See the
definition of 64-bit counters (i.e. Counter64) in RFC2578)

> At just 10 Tbps, which is already being done on 
> vendors benches, no problem, you get turnover in 
> under a month.  Isn't 21 days a turnover time frame 
> that would justify a rollover counter? 
> 
Certainly not, see Counter64 definition

Bert