[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

19990512: connection to cirrus

This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.

  • Subject: 19990512: connection to cirrus
  • Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 14:40:33 -0600
Robert,

I'm looking at cirrus and your machine, as well as the upstream
hosts to cirrus.

Currently, cirrus is running with 25 minutes latency...wxmcidas
is sitting at 1 hour latency. I also see the numerous dropped
connections.

I would like to do some throughput tests to your machine from shemp,
and have added wxmcidas to shemp's allow configuration. I know you
have had trouble with vbns routes etc, but this would let us 
remove some variables- not knowing the load on Hsie's network etc.

I'd like you to shift your feed temporarily to shemp...but if you find 
things are really unacceptable then by all means switch back to wherever you
can get a better situation. Since shemp is our LDM which can go up and down
at any time for testing, new versions etc, I don't intend for this to
be a longlasting situation...but afterall this is a testing situation.

Thanks,

Steve Chiswell



>From: weather <address@hidden>
>Organization: .
>Keywords: 199905121801.MAA17410

>I was sure that cirrus.al.noaa.gov was going to work for me, but
>over the last two weeks it is clear that from about 1600Z to 2300Z
>that is not the case.  I have not even gotten surface obs this hour(17Z).
>The routers through boulder seem to be really full this time of day.
>Also, Hsie suggested I look at his ldmd.log when I have this problem
>and I see many never completeds in his log.  Looking in there, I also
>see why I missed most of the MRF last night.  Here is a ping below to him,
>it is slow, but I don't think it accounts for all of the problems.
>I can get some of the data (McIDAS) from shemp, but I also use raw
>data and GEMPAK stuff as well.  I will try to use Colorado State, but
>the connection there looked really shaky(a lot od dropped packets).
>Maybe in other week I should start looking for another feed again
>if things have not improved.
>
>
>
>PING cirrus.al.noaa.gov: 56 data bytes
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=0. time=144. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=1. time=111. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=2. time=181. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=3. time=186. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=4. time=177. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=5. time=203. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=6. time=154. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=7. time=165. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=8. time=133. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=9. time=143. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=10. time=197. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=11. time=206. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=12. time=203. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=14. time=193. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=15. time=221. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=16. time=149. ms
>64 bytes from cirrus.al.noaa.gov (140.172.240.73): icmp_seq=17. time=125. ms
>
>
>Thanks
>Robert Mullenax
>NSBF Meteorology
>