1xdevnet

  > The example given is that a handful of users running MTR (do not get me started on this bastard program) can actually hit this rate limit. This is an outstanding example because I have seen something similar in practice.

  > Consider what that would look like, and how common it would be: If you have a NOC full of people who think they know what they're doing, but don't, that only enhances the probability that everyone is trying to troubleshoot on their own instead of doing a screenshare and coordinating their efforts - thus, you have six guys running MTR to the same IP.

  ╔═════════════╦════════════════╦══════════╦════════╦════════╦══════════╦═════════╗
  ║  Location   ║    Provider    ║ Protocol ║  Ping  ║ Jitter ║   Down   ║    Up   ║
  ╠═════════════╬════════════════╬══════════╬════════╬════════╬══════════╬═════════╣
  ║ Chicago     ║ Sharktech      ║ IPv4     ║  60 ms ║  15 ms ║ 408 Mbps ║ 23 Mbps ║
  ║ Atlanta     ║ Cloudiver      ║ IPv6     ║  67 ms ║   8 ms ║ 311 Mbps ║ 23 Mbps ║
  ║ Amsterdam   ║ "Rust backend" ║ IPv4     ║ 169 ms ║ 260 ms ║  68 Mbps ║ 20 Mbps ║
  ║ Nuremberg   ║ Hetzner        ║ IPv6     ║ 155 ms ║ 125 ms ║ 132 Mbps ║ 20 Mbps ║
  ║ Los Angeles ║ Sharktech      ║ IPv4     ║  86 ms ║  15 ms ║ 373 Mbps ║ 21 Mbps ║
  ║ Serbia      ║ SOX            ║ IPv6     ║ 188 ms ║  29 ms ║ 173 Mbps ║ 17 Mbps ║
  ║ Tokyo       ║ A573           ║ IPv4     ║ 183 ms ║  72 ms ║ 156 Mbps ║ 22 Mbps ║
  ╚═════════════╩════════════════╩══════════╩════════╩════════╩══════════╩═════════╝