10Gb Satellite Link

Unanswered Question
Apr 19th, 2012

We have a customer how has a 10Gb  Sat link between the HQ and the DR site.  On a  10GB Satellite WAN link, the 4 to 5GB of backup takes more than an hour which is highly unacceptable.  The WAN  is connected via Cisco Router and the routers are not doing any kind of  traffic filtering or policing.

The customer also has jumbo frame enabled  (on the network equipment?) at the  HQ, but at the Dr site, the jumbo frame is not enabled

Could  this possibly allow the Customer to have good experiences locally in HQ with the jumbo frame enabled, but then compromised when data is transferred externally to the  non-Jumbo Frame site?

I don't know if using a satellite link eventhough with the 10Gb bandwidth causing this issue.

Please advise!

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Average Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
e.nieuwstad Fri, 04/20/2012 - 02:40

what is the latency of the link and which method is used to transfer the date. Using TCP over a high latency link will guarantee a slow throughput for each session due to the windowsize of TCP

dschlicht Mon, 04/23/2012 - 19:07

I think you are confusing the throughput you have with satellite provider. I would bet you are on like a 12x2 or 12x3 connection... Similar to cell phone plans, satellite providers cap/limit monthly throughout.

With that said, 4 or 5 gigabytes of data transfer in an hour is great at those speeds.

Can you do bandwidth test and post screenshot of results?

Sorry to assume, but I have to when you state 10gb connection goes into a router...

Hope this helps

_dan

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App

Roman Rodichev Mon, 04/23/2012 - 19:46

Dan's on the right track. 10GB is the monthly limit, and not speed. The download speed on a satelite link will probably no more than 1Mbps, but probably even slower - like 256 or 512k. The upload will be even worse. Of course it's going to take 4-5GB to transfer in more than an hour. It's a freaking satlink!

abbas.ali@nth.com Wed, 04/25/2012 - 17:20

They are using L3 Provider  for the Wave 10Gb link.  We did some ping test such as 50 pings for each packet size starting at 36 bytes, all the way to 9001 bytes.  The average was about 36ms without jumbo frames, and the fragmentation was adding a bit of latency.  After using packets that fits into the MTU the average was 31ms.

success rate 100 percent (448300/448300), round trip min/avg/max = 28/36/272 ms.

Leo Laohoo Fri, 04/20/2012 - 02:42

10 Gbps satellite link?  Wow, that's gotta cost a friggin fortune!

Test the link with a throughput tester.

edwin.summers Wed, 04/25/2012 - 18:40

Abbas,

Can you provide a diagram or perhaps some additional information showing the basic connectivity?  With ping times like that, I believe you're using the term "satellite" as in "satellite office", meaning apart from the main site.  This is as opposed to "satellite" as in "satellite communications link".  If it were a SATCOM link, you would not see ping times anywhere near as low as you've posted.  A typical geo-sync satellite hop is 250ms+ one-way.  Not to mention, as Leo noted, would be prohibitively expensive for "10Gbps".

We need to back up and make sure we're all on the same page with our terminology.  Is the WAN link terrestrial or truly SATCOM?  If SATCOM, let's see what endpoints are involved in the ping, as the actual path latency is going to be much higher than listed.  Also need to know the actual (minimum) bandwidth of the path between the HQ and DR site.

If it is a terrestrial link, is it truly a 10Gbps link?  "GB" refers to an amount of data, not a rate.  If the link is terrestrial and the latency times are valid, let's look at the actual path bandwidth (or minimum BW of any segment in the path if applicable) and go from there.

Good luck!

Ed

Leo Laohoo Wed, 04/25/2012 - 20:11

Hi Edwin,

Even with a 10 Gbps wired WAN link, it would still be a friggin expensive.

Don't you agree?

edwin.summers Thu, 04/26/2012 - 04:54

Yes, but....it's all relative.

I would agree.  A 10Gbps WAN link would rise to the "friggin expensive" level for most folk.

dschlicht Wed, 05/02/2012 - 21:06

Relative, yes, but the point is there is not this bandwidth available via satellite providers. Best I have seen is 5mbps down.

Sent from Cisco Technical Support iPad App

Actions

Login or Register to take actions

This Discussion

Posted April 19, 2012 at 12:07 AM
Stats:
Replies:10 Avg. Rating:
Views:974 Votes:0
Shares:0
Tags: No tags.

Discussions Leaderboard

Rank Username Points
1 297
2 134
3 133
4 132
5 80
Rank Username Points
20
4