...
- Responded but Unable to attend:
Actual attendees:
Anjum, Johari, Les, Bebo. Samad got the time mixed up and was too late to attend.
After the last meeting we added Samad at SEECS to the list of invitees. We have sent him another invite so Les can call Samad on Skype.
Administration
- The workshop 1-866-740-1260, updates from Johari, Anjum, Adib.
- There are links to the presentations by Johar and Anjum at PingER Papers and Presentations.
- Follow up with MYREN.
- Anjum suggested putting together a paper on metrics provided by PingER for Sigmetrix. The due date is in November. Does someone want to take the lead - Anjum?
- Anjum and Raja have been working on a paper on Geolocation as developed for TULIP, progress
UUM
As of 10/13/2014 pinger.uum.edu.my was not pingable from SLAC. Adib fixed earlier this week. There was an interesting plateau in the RTTs to UUM from SLAC see below (black means the host was no reachable). Apart from the delay the performance in terms of lack of congestion and loss appears to be the same.
- It went well there were about 18 attendants mainly students and PhDs. A MYREN technical guy seemed very interested and there has been an exchange of emails. He is not at the decision level so is probably working with upper management to get approval. The idea would be that MYREN would install a PingEr monitor at a MYREN hosts and monitor about 20 MYREN hosts at NOCs and other sites. Given the end of year holidays there may be some delay. Joahari will reprompt the MYREN person in the New Year.
- There are links to the presentations by Johari and Anjum at PingER Papers and Presentations.
- Follow up with MYREN.
- Anjum and Raja have been working on a paper on Geolocation as developed for TULIP. Using an exponential relation between the Directivity (Alpha) and RTT for Pakistan the accuracy is ~ 18Km. Now Raja needs to run for Europe and the US. Meanwhile Raja has got a job and has less time to work on this so it is stalled.
UUM
As of 10/13/2014 pinger.uum.edu.my was not pingable from SLAC. Adib fixed earlier this week. There was an interesting plateau in the RTTs to UUM from SLAC see below (black means the host was no reachable). Apart from the delay the performance in terms of lack of congestion and loss appears to be the same.
The route change seems to be after hop 13 and before hop 16. See http://www-wanmon.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/traceroutearchive.cgi?from=www-wanmon.slac.stanford.edu&to=pinger.uum.edu.my&date1=2014_09_14&The route change seems to be after hop 13 and before hop 16. See http://www-wanmon.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/traceroutearchive.cgi?from=www-wanmon.slac.stanford.edu&to=pinger.uum.edu.my&date1=2014_09_14&date2=2014_09_22&date3=2014_09_27
...
Maria Luiza Campos of UFRJ reports that there are people at UFRJ taking care of the PingER data analytics project at this moment. Maria is now in LOA Trento Italy for 1 year post doc. Adriana Vivacqua, is now in charge of this subproject at CRDB at UFRJ. There are 11 people on the team: 4 professors1 post doc, 1 doctoral student, 2 masters students and 3 undergraduates.There is a document in which they describe the project proposal with more details.
Renan should continue our their work as soon as Cristiane Ceia begins her BSc dissertation thesis, in which Renan will be her co-advisor (together with Luiza).
...
Ridzuan and Ibrahim both requested for additional space. We require an infrastructure update for the cloud because the existing storage space is not enough, given a number of other users. The 5 Tera byte SAS along with some blade servers all have minimum 1Gig interfaces. We are in process of purchasing the switch to support the networking. Once available, we shall be able to provide the capacity for one instance of SLAC data.
UNIMAS
Pinger2 (Raspberry Pi) ran successfully from Sept 2nd to October 23. We have been unable to gather data since. It still responds to pings. The graphs below show the RTTs from SLAC to www, pinger and raspberry pi at UNIMAS. At first glimpse they are very similar. www & pi are probably closer together (more jitter and lower loss) in RTT performance than pinger. To quantify one would need to do a frequency analysis and possibly a Kolmogorov/Smirnov test.
It might be more instructive to look at the data from pinger and raspberry pi to Malaysia since the distances are shorter and the differences may show up better. For Sep-Oct 2014 when there was data measured from both Oct-Nov the averages for 20 paths was 52+-21ms (from pinger.unimas.my to 20 other Malaysian hosts) and 56+-21ms for raspberry pi to 20 other Malayisn hosts.
Traceroute server: Status unsolved. The problem is the same on Pinger2. Johari talked to the network administrator at the centre about this issues and he suggested to talk to the security manager to check whether the firewall is blocking the icmp packer from the traceroute command (to do list). No progress 9/17/2014.
SLAC data.
UNIMAS
Pinger2 (Raspberry Pi) ran successfully from Sept 2nd to October 23. We have been unable to gather data since. It still responds to pings. The graphs below show the RTTs from SLAC to www, pinger and raspberry pi at UNIMAS. At first glimpse they are very similar. www & pi are probably closer together (more jitter and lower loss) in RTT performance than pinger. To quantify one would need to do a frequency analysis and possibly a Kolmogorov/Smirnov test.
It might be more instructive to look at the data from pinger and raspberry pi to Malaysia since the distances are shorter and the differences may show up better. For Sep-Oct 2014 when there was data measured from both Oct-Nov the averages for 20 paths was 52+-21ms (from pinger.unimas.my to 20 other Malaysian hosts) and 56+-21ms for raspberry pi to 20 other Malayisn hosts.
Traceroute server: Status unsolved. The problem is the same on Pinger2. Johari talked to the network administrator at the centre about this issues and he suggested to talk to the security manager to check whether the firewall is blocking the icmp packer from the traceroute command (to do list). It is possible/probable that they are blocking the default traceroute UDP ports 33434 - 33465
UTM
After revision the FRGS proposal was submitted to RMC. It was not accepted. We need to update it again in order to fulfill the requirements of the grant.
...