IEPMPingER Internet Endtoend Performance Monitoring and the PingER project

1
IEPM/PingERInternet End-to-end Performance
Monitoring and the PingER project

• Warren Matthews and Les Cottrell (SLAC)
• National Collaboratory Middleware and Network
  Research Project Review, ANL,
• August 18-20, 2003.

2
Overview

• A little History
• Evaluate the progress
• Assess the Value
• Interactions with other projects
• Elements that should be added
• Summary

3
History

• Ping End-to-end Reporting
• Began early 1995
• Monitor network performance to sites
  collaborating with SLAC
• ESnet Network Monitoring Task Force (NMTF)
• Extended to several DoE labs, strong support from
  FNAL
• 1997 ICFA created Network Task Force
• PingER spreads worldwide
• Funded by DOE/MICS

4
Recently

• In 2001, extended PingER to include bandwidth
  testing
• IEPM-BW
• End-to-end user perception for high performance
  bulk-transfer
• Iperf, bbftp, GridFTP
• Heavy network impact compared to lightweight
  PingER

5
Current Status

• PingER funding is under Thomas Ndousse
• DoE/MICS funding runs out at end of year
• Continues to be extremely useful
• Most recently began working with ICTP/eJDS to
  quantify the Digital Divide
• MAGGIE proposal to develop/extend high
  performance monitoring (with PSC, ICIR, LBNL)

6
Overview

• A little History
• Evaluate the progress
• Assess the Value
• Interactions with other projects
• Elements that should be added
• Summary

7
PingER

• Mature, Successful
• Widely used in HENP
• Utilization has been extended beyond HENP
• EDG, IAEA, XIWT
• ICTP/eJDS
• Many others
• Continues to be extended to meet new needs
• Better visualization, web services access to data
  

8
PingER Methodology

• Simple ping monitoring
• 1 ping to prime caches
• Send, size
• Default is 10x100 Byte pkts, 10x1000 Byte pkts
• Record ping packet loss and RTT
• Derive unreachability, quiescence,
  unpredictability, jitter, TCP throughput
• Also out-of-order packets, duplicate packets

9
PingER Software

• Monitoring
• Analysis
• Visualization
• Available from SLAC/FNAL websites
• Package

10
Using PingER

• Since 1995
• Trouble shooting
• Identify Sites to Upgrade
• Choosing a provider
• Setting expectations for VoIP
• Routing Choices for multihomed sites
• Compare with http, ftp
• Strong correlation

11
PingER Deployment

• Currently 36 monitoring sites in 14 countries
• 473 target sites in 79 countries
• 99 of the worlds on-line population
• Most extensive end-to-end active RE network
  monitoring worldwide
• Special BaBar, PPDG, Digital Divide. etc groups
  and pages

12
End-to-end Monitoring

• In reality, most projects monitor end-to-end
  performance
• End host effects are unavoidable
• Internet2 end-to-end Performance Initiative
  (e2epi) has recognized this
• Most useful to users.

13
IEPM-BW

• Throughput Monitoring
• Traceroute
• Iperf (quick iperf), BBftp, BBCP (mem and disk)
• ABWE (available bandwidth)
• GridFTP, UDPMON
• Web100
• Netflow
• Analysis

14
IEPM-BW Deployment

• Currently 10 monitoring sites
• SLAC, FNAL, GATech (SOX)
• INFN (Milan), NIKHEF, APAN (Japan)
• UMich, Internet2 (Ann Arbor)
• UManchester, UCL (UK)
• 50 unique target sites

15
Using IEPM-BW

• Usual
• Baselines
• Troubleshooting
• Setting expectations
• Also on both testbeds and production nets
• Compare measurement tools (ping vs ABwE vs.
  iperf/quick iperf vs bbcp vs GridFTP vs tsunami)
• Compare advanced TCP stacks
• Eliminate need for multiple streams
• Look at non TCP bulk transfer

16
Overview

• A little History
• Evaluate the progress
• Assess the Value
• Interactions with other projects
• Elements that should be added
• Summary

17
Examples

• Long term trends
• Short term glitches
• Troubleshooting
• Upgrades
• Vacations
• Peering

18
2Mbps
vacation
Multiple OC12s
Traffic on ESnet has doubled every year
19
(No Transcript)
20
Ten-155 became operational on December 11.
To North America
Smurf Filters installed on NORDUnets US
connection.
To Western Europe
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
Traffic
Typically, Internet traffic is 70 http
24
Conclusions

• Establish layer 3 connectivity exists
• Iperf vs Quick iperf
• BBftp vs BBCP gt implementation
• IPERF vs BBftp gt CPU, Disk
• Packet Loss lt 0.1
• TCP/IP must be tuned on high-speed long delay
  paths
• Web100/Net100

25
eJDS

• PingER continues to be useful
• Recently joined with electronic journal
  distribution service (eJDS)
• Distribute physics journals to member around the
  world
• Particularly concerned with quantifying the
  Digital Divide

26
Limitations

• ICMP
• Do not monitor routers
• Rate limiting
• Blocking is common, especially in developing
  countries
• However, study indicates low impact from rate
  limiting
• Scheduling with cron

27
Overview

• A little History
• Evaluate the progress
• Assess the Value
• Interactions with other projects
• Elements that should be added
• Summary

28
Comparison to Other Projects

• Surveyor
• RIPE
• AMP
• NIMI
• SCNM
• XIWT
• NetPhysics

29
Comparisons

• Typically results were closely correlated.
• Often tools complement each other and combined
  provide insight into network behaviour.
• Derived throughput from equation of Mathis et al
  (BWMSS/(RTTsqrt(loss)) ) shows good agreement

30
Publishing

• Network Performance information is critical to
  the Grid vision
• Application steering
• Working with GGF/NMWG PPDG
• Monitoring data is available as prototype Web
  Service
• OGSI Grid service under development

31
Internet2 PIPES

• E2e pi
• PIPES infrastructure
• IEPM-BW Job manager
• MAGGIE Analysis Engine

32
Available Bandwidth Estimator (ABwE)

• Tool under development by SLAC/Rice
• Part of the DoE/SCIDAC INCITE project
• Light weight
• 60 packets in 1 second
• Iperf 35,000 packets/s for 10-20 seconds
• No need to tune windows/streams
• Replace iperf in test engine
• FreeBSD version created for Abilene Backbone
  Measurement Infrastructure

33
Quick Iperf

• Iperf is the tool of choice for many admins.
• Considered accurate but intrusive.
• Errors due to long slow start
• Use web100 to detect end of slow start. Modify
  iperf client. Web100 required on client only.
• Measurement within 10
• Save 94 time, 92 traffic

34
PingER-6

• SLAC has native IPv6 service from ESnet
• PingER ported to IPv6
• Monitoring started in November 1999
• 41 Sites in 10 countries
• edu/ac., net/net., com/co.

35
PingER -vs- PingER6
RTT between SLAC and Purdue in Nov and Dec 1999.
IPv6
IPv4
36
Overview

• A little History
• Evaluate the progress
• Asses the Value
• Interactions with other projects
• Elements that should be added
• Summary

37
MAGGIE

• Need to further develop IEPM-BW
• On-demand measurements, visualization, automated
  trouble shooting
• Measurement and Analysis for the Global Grid and
  Internet End-to-end performance
• A secure, scalable measurement infrastructure
  providing measurement, analysis and access to
  data.

38
MAGGIE
IEPM-BW Measurement Engine
SLAC
PSC
ICIR
Akenti
NWS
FNAL
NIMI Security and scheduling
Other tools
MAGGIE
ANL
SCIDAC
Publishing
AMP
Fault Finding Analysis Engine
NMWG
LBNL
RIPE
SLAC
UCL
SLAC
39
Overview

• A little History
• Evaluate the progress
• Assess the Value
• Interactions with other projects
• Elements that should be added
• Summary

40
Meeting the Objectives (1/4)Evaluate the Progress

• The problem The user cannot assume the network
  will be there.
• Even if it is, the user cannot assume it will
  perform to their expectation.
• The vision (realized) PingER has set
  expectation, provides data for troubleshooting,
  provides data for research. Continues to be
  useful.
• A Unique contribution Probably the largest
  monitoring project in the world. IEPM-BW
  comparing tools, leveraging other efforts.

41
Meeting the Objectives (2/4)Assess the value

• PingER is widely used and continues to be useful.
  
• Goals get more ambitious
• Challenges remain

42
Meeting the Objectives (3/4)Interactions Across
Projects

• Long history of involvement in other projects
• HENP, ESnet, Grid, High Performance, ICFA-SCIC
• Friends, colleagues and contacts throughout the
  world (Other worlds coming soon)
• Bright future for MAGGIE.

43
Meeting the Objectives (4/4)Assess the
Integrated Impact

• The contribution to the big picture by
  IEPM-PingER, IEPM-BW and especially the need for
  MAGGIE have been summarized by Mary-Anne and
  Thomas
• But they may not have known it

44
The Big Picture
All of the National Collaboratory and Network
Research projects have specific goals and
objectives, but all of you involved in those
projects are also part of a much larger, longer
term effort, namely creating an infrastructure
that will enable geographically separated
scientists to effectively work together as a team
and that will facilitate remote access to both
facilities and data. -Mary-Anne and Thomas
45
Toward a Monitoring Infrastructure

• Certainly the need
• DOE Science Community, SCIDAC Testbed
• Grid, Large Scale Networking
• Troubleshooting / E2Epi
• Many of the ingredients
• Many monitoring projects
• Many tools
• PIPES, MAGGIE (Cross domain)

46
Summary

• Unfortunately, network management research has
  historically been very under-funded, because it
  is difficult to get funding bodies to recognize
  this as legitimate networking research.
• Sally Floyd
• IAB Concerns Recommendations Regarding Internet
  Research Evolution.
• http//www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-rese
  arch-funding-00.txt

47
Links

• Accompanying paper
• IEPM-BW Home
• 7 papers and 35 talks in the last 12 months
• ABwE

• RIPE-TT
• E2E PI
• GGF NMWG
• AMP TroubleShooting
• Quick Iperf

48
Credits

• Connie Logg, Jerrod Williams (SLAC), Jiri
  Navratil (CESnet/SLAC), David Martin, Frank Nagy,
  Al Thomas, Maxim Grigoriev (FNAL), Fabrizio
  Coccetti (INFN/SLAC).
• Brian Tierney, Eric Boyd, Jeff Boote, Matt
  Zekauskas, Matt Mathis, Russ Hobby, Vern Paxson,
  Andy Adams, kc Claffy, Iosif Legrand, Ajay
  Tirumala, Tom Dunigan.
• Local admins and other volunteers
• DoE/MICS