...
Invitees: Anjum, Kashif, Johari, Nara, Abdullah, Badrul+, Hanan, Fidah12Fidah, Saqib+, Les+, Raja+, Umar+ and Bebo+
...
Dr Nor Badrul Anuar Jumaat has installed PingER on a cloud at UM. The machines are virtualized and running Ubuntu Linux. The name and address of the server is pinger.fsktm.um.edu.my (202.185.107.238). Anjum pointed out that at NUST they are having a problem with a virtual machine running pinger2.pl and the /tmp/ disk space filling up. Anjum is exploring this in more detail, so at the moment it is just a head's up. Johari has sent Kashif's workshop presentations to Dr. Nor. The UM monitoring host has been added to the NODELIST PingER meta data base at SLAC and the <HostList> for Malaysian and S.E Asian hosts has been added to the pinger.xml file at UM. We need to get the latest pinger2.pl installed. Since the traceroute is working, Badrul can will work with some of his students to make a routing study similar to https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/IEPM/Routing+from+UNIMAS. he plans to have something for the meeting in 2 weeks time
NUST
From Arshad: Rector has agreed to support one person visit to SLAC. Raja has been nominated. He has sent a cv to Les and has filled out the DoE form. Les crafted the invitation and it has been sent to upper management for signature Dec 21, 2012.Les briefed the SLAC Cybersecurity person on 1/10/2013. He has also filled out another form for hosting visitors from sensitive nations. Les has taken and passed the training on hosting visitors from sensitive nations. Cybersecurity want more details on what Raja can access and Les has provided it. SLAC CyberSecurity say they do not approve or disapprove visitors so I have requested (2/8/2013) the CIO to sign and pass to the CEO for signature. Raja has completed his paperwork and is ready to submit. As soon as Les hears the letter has been signed by the CIO (and before it is sent to Raja), Les will get back to Raja to proceed. He has sent 2 reminders to the cybersecrity person and engaged the CIO in the latest.
Raja reports that the code is working fine now without any underestimates. The problem was that he was using Alpha values that were above 80% of the data points (in Alpha Analysis) for each RTT range but now I have changed that to 95%.
He tried to geolocated a landmark in Europe i.e.icfamon.dl.ac.uk using both a fixed Alpha value (0.55 in this case) that was 95% above overall and also using a set of Alpha values which were used as a function of the RTT value. For the fixed Alpha value case the error distance was 746KM where as for the variable Alpha case the error was 530KM. For this test case, using Alpha values as a function of RTT looks promising. In both cases however the Error of geolocation is significant, this is probably due to the fact the target was not in the Convex Hull of the landmarks that responded. It turns out we should exclude icfamon.dl.ac.uk since we uncertain to with 150 miles where it s located (near Oxford or near Liverpool). Raja will repeat and process for different targets and different regions and see how well that goes.
Raja also reports that there are a lot of PlanetLab landmarks being used by reflector in Europe that have the same Lat Long (51 , 9). The min RTT of these landmarks to the target varied from 20ms to 45ms which would imply that they are not at the same location? Shouldn't we avoid using servers as landmarks unless we know their exact location? We recommend not using any such sites or sites that have no digits after the decimal point.
Potential projects
...