On 18/9/14, 2:55 PM, Robert Kisteleki wrote:
It'd be pretty difficult to administer quotas per target. Instead, our line of thinking at the moment is: * to separate the one-offs from the ongoing measurements; ie. there should be X one-off and X ongoing slots. This would allow users to do ad-hoc measurements even if the destination is otherwise well-measured
In this particular case, this would not suffice, since I'm trying to setup new ongoing measurements. 2 per IP, actually, for 4 IPs. It looks like they are all maxed out. This wasn't the case a month ago.
* to switch to a model where we calculate the expected load on the target, like probes*frequency/time_interval, instead of pure number of measurements (which can have 1..10..100.1000 probes). In this model one could start a new measurement against a target even if there are a 1000 running already, as long as those measurements are not too heavy
Still, this would not address the fact that some IPs will simply always receive more measurements than others as they are more "popular". It just so happens that our IPs in question are okay to be measured more than others, as they are anycasted and have many servers running this IP. So I'm not worried about "over-measuring", and would prefer to have the limit raised on these. If we can prove ownership of these IPs, then perhaps this is something that can be done. Jared seems to have had luck in getting the NCC to raise the limit for individual IPs. ~paul -- Paul Vlaar DNS Infrastructure Group Afilias e-mail: pvlaar@afilias.info phone: +1-416-673-4078 mobile DE: +49-1578-5742-695 mobile NL: +31-6-506-306-35 mobile USA: +1-602-410-4148