Search /
Docfinder:
Advanced search  |  Help  |  Site map
RESEARCH CENTERS
SITE RESOURCES
Click for Layer 8! No, really, click NOW!
Networking for Small Business
TODAY'S NEWS
iPhone 5 rumor rollup for the week ending Feb. 10
Forget Public Cloud or Private Cloud, It's All About Hyper-Hybrid
Apple passes HP as largest tech company
How to get the IRS' attention: Forge nearly $8 million in tax returns, steal identities
Much of Western U.S. is a 3G wasteland, says FCC
How the Phoenix Suns basketball team takes on social media attacks
Microsoft details Windows 8 for ARM devices
Resume Makeover: How an Information Security Professional Can Target CSO Jobs
Blogger exposes major Google Wallet security flaw
Web app lets enterprise set security, sharing for Google Apps users
Cloudscaling to offer OpenStack private cloud platform
Macs take on the enterprise
Valentine's Day Patch Tuesday: Microsoft to issue 9 patches, 4 critical
Mobile World Congress sneak peek: Quad-core smartphones, Ice Cream Sandwich & more
/

Related linksToday's breaking news
Send to a friendFeedback

There has been something of a religious war going on among performance monitoring tool vendors over the merits of synthetic transactions versus watching actual network traffic.

Simulated application traffic takes the client and server machines out of the equation.

Rather than measuring the response time for an actual transaction, which would involve processing on the client and server ends, packets that mimic an application data flow are sent between agents on either end of the network link being monitored. This lets you measure the performance of the network apart from all other elements that may affect performance.

The other alternative is to passively monitor actual data flows over the network. This gives you a better idea of what users are actually experiencing. True enough, but it also makes it tougher to troubleshoot problems; any element in the path could be at fault - network, server or client.

Thankfully, the religious war seems to be coming to an end as a number of vendors are incorporating both technologies into their products.

Ganymede, for example, this month is expected to ship a new version of its Pegasus product that adds the passive technique to the existing support for simulated transactions.

"The religious war is not doing anybody any good," says Jim McQuaid director of monitoring solutions at Ganymede. "Both techniques have value."

Concord last month essentially went the same route when it announced Network Health - Response, a new response-time monitoring utility for its Network Health network performance monitor.

"Now you can compare and contrast data sources, the synthetic vs. actual," says Kevin Conklin, vice president of marketing at Concord. Concord is also working with Ganymede, NetScout, Response Networks and Cisco to enable users to pull response time and/or RMON data from their tools into Network Health, letting the Concord product incorporate that data into its Web-based reporting engine. Additionally, Concord is now reselling a response time monitor from First Sense.

RELATED LINKS

Network fire prevention
You'll need a tool kit that includes performance monitoring gear, application modeling tools and, soon, neural network software. Network World, 9/20/99.


NWFusion offers more than 40 FREE technology-specific email newsletters in key network technology areas such as NSM, VPNs, Convergence, Security and more.
Click here to sign up!
New Event - WANs: Optimizing Your Network Now.
Hear from the experts about the innovations that are already starting to shake up the WAN world. Free Network World Technology Tour and Expo in Dallas, San Francisco, Washington DC, and New York.
Attend FREE
Your FREE Network World subscription will also include breaking news and information on wireless, storage, infrastructure, carriers and SPs, enterprise applications, videoconferencing, plus product reviews, technology insiders, management surveys and technology updates - GET IT NOW.