Sure, for MSFT only then MSFT tools are fine. Most networks now are a
mix requiring tools that run on all platforms and systems. Iperf3 is
designed for capacity tests and does say use iperf2. Yet most still use
Iperf3 because 3 is larger than 2 and they don't understand the
technical differences. Yo...
@rjmcmahon Please keep in mind that I am in support, so the article is
support slanted. From a Microsoft supportability perspective, we need
internally trusted tools like ntttcp and ctsTraffic that we (Microsoft
support) can use for troubleshooting purposes when addressing networking
issues related ...
@JamesKehr Hi James, It's not in the interests for a platform vendor to
supply the tool to test their platform, particularly if that tool is
platform or os specific. It has to be broadly accepted as reliable, open
& transparent to code changes, and vendor independent. Iperf 2 goes back
like 15 years...
Thanks again, @rjmcmahon ! In true Microsoft fashion, we have a separate
tool just for latency called Latte. https://github.com/microsoft/latte
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/virtual-network/virtual-network-test-latency?tabs=windows
@JamesKehrYeah, it's a common misconception that a bigger number means
better. In iperf's case, the number indicates different development
teams with different goals. Iperf 3 is a misnomer as it's a not a follow
on to the original iperf. Iperf 2 is based from the original code.I'd
suggest trying ipe...
Latest Comments