Subject: [IMRG] Re: IMRG digest, Vol 1 #9 - 4 msgs

From: Loki Jorgenson <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 09:25:12 -0700

On the general theme of "being good scientists", this community's efforts
should include some stab at error analysis for the classes of methodologies
being employed.  There are a wide range of error sources from well-understood
statistical origins, to resolution limits on hardware and techniques, to the influence
of systems that are only partly understood (the networks and traffic themselves).

Not that this is a particularly juicy part of the work.  But someone has to count
the beans...  any volunteers?

> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 08:13:20 -0400
> From: [email-masked] (P.F. Chimento)
> To: [email-masked] (Rolf Riedi),
>    [email-masked] ("Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student)")
> Cc: [email-masked] (Ratul Mahajan),
>    [email-masked] (Constantinos), [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [IMRG] Measurement TCPs
> 
> I agree with Rolf and Henk; if we have pretensions of being
> true scientists, then you have to have repeatability of results
> and for that you need to have exact procedures and the raw data.
> Yes, I know that not everyone has access to the same links/systems,
> but the results can be checked. Not a bad thing when you realize how
> subtly numerical errors can creep into computations.
> 
> Regards, Phil Chimento
> 
> __________________________________________________________________
--
Loki Jorgenson
Director, Research
jaalaM Technologies
The Hudson House
Suite 400 - 321 Water Street
Vancouver, BC, Canada, V6B 1B8

e [email-masked]
t 604 433 2333 ext 105
f 604 433 2311
m 604 837-0240
w www.jaalam.com
_______________________________________________
IMRG mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imrg