1 / 8

End to end Internet Performance today

End to end Internet Performance today. Prepared by Les Cottrell, SLAC, for the Extending the Reach of Advanced Networking: Special International Workshop Arlington, VA., April 22, 2004 www.slac.stanford.edu/grp/scs/net/talk03/i2-overview-apr04.ppt.

amity-barrera
Télécharger la présentation

End to end Internet Performance today

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. End to end Internet Performance today Prepared by Les Cottrell, SLAC, for the Extending the Reach of Advanced Networking: Special International Workshop Arlington, VA., April 22, 2004 www.slac.stanford.edu/grp/scs/net/talk03/i2-overview-apr04.ppt Partially funded by DOE/MICS Field Work Proposal on Internet End-to-end Performance Monitoring (IEPM), also supported by IUPAP

  2. Countries Monitored Monitor site Remote site • Monitoring hosts • 35 hosts • 13 Countries Countries monitored contain over 90% of the world’s Internet connected population • Remote hosts • >105 countries • 560 sites • 880 hosts • 3650pairs

  3. Loss to world from US Loss Rate < 0.1 to 1 % 1 to 2.5 % 2.5 to 5 % 5 to 12 % > 12 % 2001 Dec-2003 • In 2001 <20% of the world’s population had Good or Acceptable Loss performance • BUT by December 2003It had improved to 77%

  4. Trends C. Asia, Russia, S.E. Europe, L. America, M. East, China: 4-5 yrs behind India, Africa: 7 yrs behind S.E. Europe, Russia: catching up Latin Am., Mid East, China: keeping up India, Africa: falling behind Many institutes in developing world have less performance than a household in N. America or Europe

  5. Within Developing Regions • Not unusual for communications within developing regions to go via developed region, e.g. • Rio to Sao Paola goes directly within Brazil • But Rio to Buenos Aires goes via Florida • And… • NIIT – NSC (Rawalpindi – Islamabad) few miles apart, • No peering in Pakistan, can this be changed? • Route goes via England!!!! • Takes longer to go few miles than to SLAC! • Also within a region can be big differences between sites/countries, due to service providers

  6. Loss to Africa (example of variability)

  7. Technology Achievement Index (TAI) • TAI captures how well a country is creating and diffusing technology and building a human skills base. • TAI from UNDP hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2001/en/pdf/techindex.pdf TAI top 12 Finland 0.744 US 0.733 Sweden 0.703 Japan 0.698 Korea Rep. of 0.666 Netherlands 0.630 UK 0.606 Canada 0.589 Australia 0.587 Singapore 0.585 Germany 0.583 Norway 0.579 US & Canada off-scale

  8. Summary • Performance from U.S. & Europe is improving all over • Performance to developed countries are orders of magnitude better than to developing countries • Poorer regions 5-10 years behind • Poorest regions Africa, Caucasus, Central & S. Asia • Some regions are: • catching up (SE Europe, Russia), • keeping up (Latin America, Mid East, China), • falling further behind (e.g. India, Africa)

More Related