Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Looking into moving PingER to a "blockchain" database good for decentralizing distribution of data. Monitoring sites would then be able to write to a distributed ledger. This would change the architecture to a more peer to peer architecture. It helps with continuity of PingER since reduces dependence on a single site (SLAC). See Block Chain in Future PingER Projects. Bebo sent several references to Saqib who has looked at them. We could start with real-time data without including the whole archive, i.e. in parallel to the continued centrally managed archive. It would be a private Blockchain and hence not be as compute intensive as a public blockchain.  Bebo's impression is that Saqib will lead in putting the ides in his paper into practice. Saqib will need some students.  Saqib's oss boss is going to the NY City meeting.

...

Umar looking at extending the comparison IPv6 vs IPv4 ping RTTs and TCP vs ICMP/ping RTTs. See Towards Analysis of ICMP vs TCP Ping Latencies

  • See Towards Analysis of ICMP vs TCP Ping Latencies - Umar
    • Looked into Traffic Differentiation - Rate Limiting vs. Traffic Prioritization (QoS)
    • IPv6 results gathered using ping-vs-tcp.pl script. About 56 nodes with IPv6 addresses, 14 of which responded with Npings

    • IPv4 results gathered from SLAC and Virginia Tech
      • SLAC's batch may be downloaded here (approx. 24 MB)
      • Skimmed results; findings are pretty much the same as before
  • Pending
    • Identified relevant events in the network stack that highlight timing (_RECVFROM, _RECVMSG, _IP_RECV, _NETIF_RX etc.). Looking for instrumentation that enables us to measure timestamps. We also need to figure out how to determine whether ICMP & TCP traffic are treated differently? and then how to measure the difference?
      • perf-tools allows us to measure transport events
      • If we could assume that the path for ICMP & TCP through the network is the same, then the only difference between two (controlled) tests would be the time spent in the transport layers. This can be measured using perftools. 
      • However, such measurements must be made in a controlled environment where ICMP and TCP are treated the same. (I say so because some results — e.g., in East Asia and South Asia — clearly show that ICMP performs much worse than TCP.)
    • We would also need to cater for cross traffic and queuing delays. Given how small the differences are, one may argue that the variations in measurements are due to cross traffic. Perhaps we should start with controlled tests and then see if real world measurements reflect similar behavior.
    • We need to setup a test environment. We can either setup a bare-metal box or use a VM. 
      • I will see if I can arrange for a bare-metal box.

...