1 / 49

IP Performance Measurements using Surveyor

IP Performance Measurements using Surveyor. Matt Zekauskas matt@advanced.org Guy Almes, Sunil Kalidindi August, 1998 ISMA 98. Outline. Background Surveyor infrastructure Reporting and analysis Status. I: Background. Internet topology is increasingly complex

paniz
Télécharger la présentation

IP Performance Measurements using Surveyor

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. IP Performance Measurements using Surveyor Matt Zekauskas matt@advanced.org Guy Almes, Sunil Kalidindi August, 1998 ISMA 98

  2. Outline • Background • Surveyor infrastructure • Reporting and analysis • Status

  3. I: Background • Internet topology is increasingly complex • Commonly used measurement tools (like ping and traceroute) are inadequate • Result: users don’t understand the Internet’s performance and reliability

  4. IP Performance Metrics • IETF IPPM effort • Framework RFC • One-way delay and packet loss drafts • Others: connectivity, bulk transfer, DV • Surveyor: implementation of one-way delay and packet loss metrics

  5. Motivation for measuring delay • Minimum of delay: transmission/propagation delay • Variation of delay: queuing delay • Large delay makes sustaining high-bandwidth flows harder • Erratic variation in delay makes real-time apps harder

  6. Uses • Problem determination • Engineering (trends, loads) • Feedback to advanced applications(e.g., Tele-Immersion, CMU’s Odyssey) • Monitor QoS

  7. One-way versus round trip • Paths are asymmetric • Even when paths are symmetric, forward and reverse paths may have radically different performance - asymmetric queuing

  8. II. The Surveyor Infrastructure • Measurement machines at campuses and at other interesting places along paths (e.g., gigaPoPs, interconnects) • GPS to synchronize clocks • Centralized database to store measurement data • Web based reporting and analysis tools

  9. II. Surveyor Infrastructure Measurement machines

  10. Dell 400 MHz Pentium Pro 128 MBytes RAM; 2 GBytes disk BSDI Unix TrueTime GPS card and antenna Network Interface (10/100bT, FDDI) Special driver for the GPS card Measurement Machines

  11. Measurement Technology • Active tests of one-way delay and loss • Measurement daemon • Test packets time-stamped with GPS time • Back-to-back calibration: 95% of measurements ± 50 s • Measurements centrally managed • Truer-time daemon to watch clocks

  12. Ongoing Tests

  13. Ongoing Tests - Delay • Type-P • 12 byte UDP packets, 40 bytes total • Port “random” per session • Scheduled using a Poisson Process • average rate: 2 per second • “Mostly” full mesh

  14. Ongoing Tests - Routing • Traceroute to same sites as One-Way delay • Scheduled with Poisson process • average rate: one every 10 minutes

  15. Collecting Results

  16. Central Database Machine • SGI Origin 200 • 2 processors, 256MB • 327GB Fibrechannel-attached RAIDfor data storage(DataDirect Networks EV-1000)

  17. Collects performance data from the measurement machines [ssh, pull] Stores the data in a home-grown database Serves data and summaries to reporting and analysis tools [http] Central Database Machine

  18. Current Surveyor Deployment • 28 machines, 623 paths • CSG Schools • Tele-Immersion Labs • National Labs • NASA Ames • CA*net2 Ottawa site • Auckland, NZ • …others

  19. Surveyor Map (N. America)

  20. III. Reporting and analysis tools • Web based Tools • Daily summary reports • Integration with traceroute measurements

  21. Daily summary reports Take a 24-hour sample for a given path Divide it into one-minute sub-samples For each one-minute sub-sample: Minimum delay (blue) 50th percentile (green) 90th percentile (red)

  22. Example daily reports • Advanced Network & Services and University of Chicago • path is symmetric • asymmetric queuing

  23. Examples (continued) • Advanced Network & Services and University of Pennsylvania • path asymmetric

  24. Examples (continued) • CMU to Brown University

  25. Examples - Route Change • Advanced Network & Services toPenn State University • Route change switched providers, and removed one provider from the path

  26. Examples - Auckland • University of Auckland, NZ toUniversity of Washington, Seattle • Asymmetric queuing, congested trans-pacific path

  27. IV Status • Deployment rate: 1/week • Planned: Abilene backbone • probe at each backbone router • experiment with piecewise delay

  28. Full Mesh of End-to-end Paths O(N2) paths

  29. Paths with Exchange Points O(X2+N)

  30. Abilene Router Nodes gigaPoPs Universities

  31. Near-term improvements • Improve measurement software • time stamping in-kernel: to scale without losing accuracy • New and improved analyses • real-time display tools • flag interesting paths • trends … • improved data export to other sites

  32. Summary • One-way Delay and Loss are • practical • useful • Surveyor infrastructure growing • Now focus on analysis and applications

  33. More info • Surveyor project info • http://www.advanced.org/surveyor/ • Email: mm-info@advanced.org • Access to plots • Email me - matt@advanced.org • IETF IPPM WG • http://www.advanced.org/IPPM/

More Related