Ping End-to-End Reporting (PingER) presentation for PERN/PERN2 Special Interest Group for Network Monitoring

Transcription

1 Ping End-to-End Reporting (PingER) presentation for PERN/PERN2 Special Interest Group for Network Monitoring

2 PingER Project Arguably the world s most extensive active end-to-end Internet Performance Project (emphasis Digital Divide) Partially funded by MoST Pakistan, US State Department Last six years - a joint development effort of Stanford University (SLAC) & NUST (SEECS) Many SEECS students cut their teeth on it, several research papers & studies Results: Highly successful in quantifying E2E performance (e.g ICFA - SCIC International Committee for Future Accelerators Standing Committee on Inter-Regional Connectivity) Identified & quantified rates of improvement for regions/countries How far behind, catching up, falling behind Many presentations to funding agencies, politicians, NRENs, recommendations Case studies identified: fragility of e2e connections, last mile congestion problems, inefficient routing

3 PingER Methodology monitoring host once a day Internet 10 ping requests, each 30 mins ping response packets Measure Round Trip Time & Loss data repository remote host (typically a web-server)

4 Pinger Architecture Monitor hosts send 21 pings each 30 mins to Remote Hosts and cache results Archive hosts gather data daily, save, analyze & make results available publicly via web

5 Pinger Deployment 166 countries (98.3% world s population, >99% world s connected population) 45 monitoring nodes in 23 countries 890 remote nodes at over 650 sites in over 165 countries (beacons ~ 90)!

6 What is measured? E2E Network Performance Metrics Round Trip Time (delay/latency) - ms Packet Loss - % Throughput (derived) Kbps Jitter - ms Unreachability - %

7 Why are we here? Deployment of PingER monitoring nodes at the 80+ universities connected via PERN Facilitate measurement of user-experience End-to-end performance measurement Urge universities to utilize PERN connectivity Host university servers on PERN links Provide universities with real-world measurements for analysis and research Build network monitoring tools Analyse network measurements

8 Why is this important? Problem Diagnosis is challenging Convince service providers that there is a problem Need multiple pieces of information from multiple sources Performance measurements facilitates Network operations Allows for trend analysis, planning and provisioning

9 World View

10 Throughput as seen from US Behind Europe 6 Yrs: Russia, Latin America 7 Yrs: Mid-East, SE Asia 10 Yrs: South Asia 11 Yrs: Cent. Asia 12 Yrs: Africa South Asia, Central Asia, and Africa are in Danger of Falling Even Farther Behind!

11 Case Study: Pakistan

12 Monitoring nodes in Pakistan Location No. of monitoring nodes SEECS, NUST, Islamabad 4 NCP, Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad 1 COMSATS University, Islamabad 1 Pakistan Education Research Network (PERN), Islamabad 1 Micronet/Nayatel Pakistan, Islamabad 1

13 Remote nodes in Pakistan Remote Node University/ Organization Location Service Provider Available Bandwidth End Host Location LSE (lahoreschoolofeconomics.edu.pk) Lahore!! Lahore COMSATS (comsats.edu.pk) Islamabad PERN! Islamabad BUITMS (buitms.edu.pk) Quetta PERN! Quetta SSUET (ssuet.edu.pk) Karachi PERN! Karachi UPESH ( Peshawar PERN*! Islamabad PIEAS ( Nilore PERN*! Islamabad NUST/SEECS ( formerly NIIT Islamabad Micronet/ Nayatel (dsl.net.pk) and PERN Mbps and 32 Mps Islamabad GIKI ( Topi PERN*! Topi UET (uet.edu.pk) Lahore PERN*! Lahore HU (hu.edu.pk) Hazara PERN*! Hazara PERN ( Islamabad PERN! Islamabad DSL.NET (dsl.net.pk) Islamabad Micronet/ Nayatel (dsl.net.pk)! Islamabad NAYATEL (nayatel.com) Islamabad Micronet/ Nayatel (dsl.net.pk) Islamabad SDNPK (wb.sdnpk.org) Islamabad Cyber NET (cyber.net.pk)! Islamabad

14 Deployment in Pakistan

15 Average RTT (ms)!" #!!" $!!" %!!" &!!" '!!" (!!" )!!" *+,-!)"./0-!)" 120-!)"./3-!)" 456-!)" 457-!)" 158-!)" 9+2-!)" :;<-!)" 4/6-!A" *+,-!A"./0-!A" 120-!A"./3-!A" 456-!A" 457-!A" 158-!A" 9+2-!A" :;<-!A" 4/6-!B"!"#$%%&'()*&!"#$%%&+)&),,-&./0(&122314&561%&7,8&9:&;&<+-&9=& G9E" J:.91I9" =1K1IEG" LMN.I9" 99MEI" MCE9O" CNE19" PNDN" MEI" OM"

16 Average RTT (ms)!"#$%&''%()*+% #!!" '#!" '!!" &#!" &!!" %#!" %!!" $#!"!"215#2%&''%5*%)25*6123%78%9/.#:&%)-./0-1/.#%*/02*% (--2(<"*8(1" *2+<"=58" $!!" #!"!" ()*+," +-.*" )(/0*-1" /(-" 234(51(" *5651-/" 78941(" ((8-1" 8+-(:",-./0-123%4/02*% +9-5(" *8(1" ;9,9" 8-1" :8"

17 Packet Loss (%)!" #" $" %" &" '!" '#" '$" ()*+!," -./+!," 01/+!," -.2+!," 345+!," 346+!," 047+!," 8)1+!," 9:;+!," <=>+!,"?):+!," 3.5+!&" ()*+!&" -./+!&" 01/+!&" -.2+!&" 345+!&" 346+!&" 047+!&" 8)1+!&" 9:;+!&" <=>+!&"?):+!&" 8?<AB" ACD<"?8EF<CG" E8C" H9-80G8" <0I0GCE" JKL-G8" 88KCG" KAC8M" ALC08" NLBL" KCG" MK"

18 Packet Loss (%)!"#$%&'()**'+,-' )" (" '" &" %" $" #"!"!"#$%&'()**'.%%/'01)2'.334.5'6%7'89':';"/'8<' $'<C"2+0;+6D7+".+EF/6" )'<C"2+0;+6D7+" *+,-!)"./0-!)" 120-!)"./3-!)" 456-!)" 457-!)" 158-!)" 9+2-!)" :;<-!)" 4/6-!A" *+,-!A"./0-!A" 120-!A"./3-!A" 456-!A" 457-!A" 158-!A" 9+2-!A" :;<-!A" 4/6-!B"

19 Packet Loss (%)!"#$"%&'(")*+,,)-./) $!"!!#,"!!# +"!!# *"!!# )"!!# ("!!# '"!!# &"!!# %"!!# $"!!# 5+%1&+#1%(),1&",);1&<1%)!'41,&'%) -./01# 023/#.-4"/25# 4-2# # /9:9524# ;<=85-# --<25# <02-># 0+%1&+#"2)31&",) 0=29-# /<-5#?=1=# <25# ><#

20 Throughput (Kbps)!"#$!%&'()%*(+$,-$./+0102$ +!!!"!!# *!!!"!!# )!!!"!!# (!!!"!!# '!!!"!!# &!!!"!!# %!!!"!!#!"#$!%&'()%*(+$80$9580(&56$.:$#/4);<$9'4/+'&/4)$ 0/+50$=/+%/4$#8-/0+84$ $!!!"!!#!"!!#,-./0# /12.# -,3".14# 3,1# 567,84,# 9:;74,#,,:14# :/1,<# 3'4/+'&56$7/+50$ /;18,#.:,4# =;0;# :14#

21 Mathis et. al Throughput or Rate < (MSS ~1460 Bytes/RTT)*(1 / sqrt(loss)) The macroscopic behavior of the TCP congestion avoidance algorithm by Mathis, Semke, Mahdavi & Ott in Computer Communication Review, 27(3), July 1997

22 Traceroute results Last mile effects

23 Unreachability & Loss!

24 Average RTT (ms)

25 Average RTT (ms)!" #!!" $!!" %!!" &!!" '!!" (!!" )!!" *+,-! %"./0-! &" 123-!&" 4+5-! &" *+,-! &"./0-! '" 123-!'" 4+5-! '" *+,-! '"./0-! (" 123-!(" 4+5-! (" *+,-! ("./0-! )" 123-!)" 4+5-! )" *+,-! )"./0-! 6" 123-!6" 4+5-! 6" *+,-! 6"!"#$%%&'()*&!"#$%%&+,-&./01)2/3&/)&)443&+-,(&56!7& $'78"5+0,+39:+".+;</3" )'78"5+0,+39:+"

26 Inferences National backbone is well provisioned Last mile effects congestion & losses power outages

27 Deploy PingER What to do? Monitoring & reverse traceroute scripts to be installed Node owned by the respective university PingER requirements Node should run Linux Node name must be registered with a DNS Web (http) and ICMP (ping traceroute) traffic should be allowed Node preferably close to the border (DMZ), can be within the local LAN Minimal disk storage and network access

28 Conclusion Performance monitoring is vital for network operations, trend analysis, planning and provisioning Provides opportunities for computer network research We encourage all universities to participate and utilize the PERN connectivity

29 Thank you Questions?

30 Selected Projects Anomalous Event Detector TULIP - Trilateration Utility for Locating IP Addresses PingER validation toolkit PingER regional case studies Africa, Pakistan, South Asia, East Asia, Latin America etc ICFA reports 2007, 2008 and 2009 ViPER - PingER Visualization PingER motion charts PingER executive plots Google maps for PingER and many others...

31 TULIP Trilateration Utility for locating IP addresses!

32 PingER Motion Charts