[atlas] probe allocations
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] probe allocations
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] need higher timeout value for ping
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net
Thu Nov 14 19:40:06 CET 2013
On 14.11.2013, at 17:47 , Gilles Massen <gilles.massen at restena.lu> wrote: > > On 11/14/2013 10:19 AM, Daniel Karrenberg wrote: > >> With hindsight(!) this shows that adding and removing probes in >> existing measurements was probably not such a good design choice, >> although I supported it in order to allow repleneshing the probe pool >> of long-running measurements. > >> From a simple user point of view I have mixed feelings toward that > feature: on one hand it would prevent long running measurements from > decaying, on the other hand if you run (multiple) measurements on a > specific set of probes you might not want them to drift apart. Don't worry. No matter how we implement it, it will be configurable. e.g.: if the number of probes drops below a configurable threshold one will have the option to stop the measurement or replenish. Or one can do nothing until there is no probe left. > > Gilles > > -- > Fondation RESTENA - DNS-LU > 6, rue Coudenhove-Kalergi > L-1359 Luxembourg > tel: (+352) 424409 > fax: (+352) 422473 > > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 163 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ripe-atlas/attachments/20131114/ad3956d9/attachment.sig>
- Previous message (by thread): [atlas] probe allocations
- Next message (by thread): [atlas] need higher timeout value for ping
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]