- ripe-atlas - mailman.ripe.net

Fwd: [ipv6-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Test your IPv6 Reachability by Using RIPE Atlas (now visualised)
by kix 23 Jul '12

23 Jul '12

fyi. I think this mail was not sent to this mail list. Cheers, kix -------- Mensaje original -------- Asunto: [ipv6-wg] New on RIPE Labs: Test your IPv6 Reachability by Using RIPE Atlas (now visualised) Fecha: 17/07/2012 14:32 Remitente: Mirjam Kuehne <mir(a)ripe.net> Destinatario: ipv6-wg(a)ripe.net [apologies for duplicate mails] Dear colleagues, As announced in earlier, it is possible for RIPE NCC members to do IPv6-traceroutes from all RIPE Atlas probes to IPv6 destinations. In this new article on RIPE Labs we present a first experimental analysis and a prototype visualisation of the traceroute results: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/visualise-your-ipv6-connectivity-us… Kind Regards, Mirjam Kuehne RIPE NCC -- Rodolfo García Peñas (kix) http://www.kix.es

7 7

Concurrent traceroute issues on the probes
by David Lebrun 23 Jul '12

23 Jul '12

Hi all, I was wondering whether the probes can perform multiple concurrent traceroutes toward different destinations, and if so, are they able to differentiate the replies ? I just ran into this problem with paris-traceroute, the path were completely mixed up and stderr output looking like the following messages multiple times (IP addresses redacted): [WARN](TracertImpl.cc, 368)A reply received with bad original destination address A.B.C.D, should be W.X.Y.Z [WARN](TracertImpl.cc, 326)Bad return flow id 0x4d2 from E.F.G.H [WARN](TracertImpl.cc, 331)ICMP reserved words 0 0 0 0 0 As the probes use paris-traceroute, I prefer to be sure that the results are not flawed. David

2 4

Embedd built-in measurement page into website
by Bartsch, Rene 23 Jul '12

23 Jul '12

Hi, is there any way to embedd the "Built-in Measurements"-JQuery-Frame of my probes into a publically accessible website? Thanx for any hint, Renne -- Sent with love from the new tine 2.0 email client ... Please visit http://tine20.org

2 1

High inbound traffic causing packet loss?
by Tibor Djurica Potpara 23 Jul '12

23 Jul '12

Hello! I have just received an Atlas probe and I have been observing some weird readouts on the Atlas portal. Especially, occasional packet loss and considerable jitter, even to first and second hop destinations. I am surprised because even though I am a home user, I have a very stable connection (FTTH, 100/10 Mbps) and I've never experienced such connectivity issues. I've attached the probe directly to the ISP-provided switch that doesn't do IGMP snooping and since IP multicast is used for IPTV, high traffic (up to 50 Mbps) is occasionally flooded to all the switch ports. Taking into account that the probe is underpowered in terms of CPU, is it possible that it cannot handle such traffic and thus reports packet loss? If such is the case, I will move the probe behind a router to filter the multicast streams out. Best regards, Tibor Djurica Potpara

2 1

Flood-ping to measure packet loss?
by Bartsch, Rene 18 Jul '12

18 Jul '12

Hi, I've just started hosting a probe and I'm new to the list, so a "Hello" to all! :) Does the probe send simple pings or does it send flood pings (e.g. ping -f -c 1000 <destination>) for detection of packet loss? Best regards, Renne -- Sent with love from the new tine 2.0 email client ... Please visit http://tine20.org

3 3

Firmware 4470 to be released soon
by Ann Barcomb 11 Jul '12

11 Jul '12

Hello, Probe firmware version 4470 will be released soon. This version includes a small data structure change from 4460 which only affects DNS measurements: the addition of the optional field 'src_addr'. We have also published a correction for version 4460, which mistakenly listed a field 'src' for DNS measurements. This field does not exist in 4460. http://weir-dev.atlas.ripe.net/doc/data_struct#v4460_dns Kind Regards, Ann -- Ann Barcomb RIPE NCC Community Builder http://www.ripe.net Measurements Community Building +31 20 535 4444

2 1

Atlas infrastructure issues on Friday, 2012-06-29
by Robert Kisteleki 03 Jul '12

03 Jul '12

Dear Atlas users, As part of regular maintenance, last Thursday (2012-06-28) afternoon we upgraded the OS on a subset of our controlling infrastructure. During this work, some Atlas probes were told to hold back result reporting. A consequence of this was that when reconnecting, these probes sent in way more (and bigger) results than usual. Unfortunately, not all of the upgraded components ("controllers") had enough disk space to deal with the sudden increased data inflow. The combination of these events means that part of our infrastructure could not buffer results submitted from the probes, and as a result these results have been discarded. The event lasted approximately between 22h Thursday and 05h Friday (UTC), and affected about 30% of the probes. These probes will have a gap in their downloadable data sets and on their graphs. Since the event we increased the capacity of the involved infrastructure components. This will help us avoiding the same event occurring again. We apologise for the inconvenience this may cause. Regards, Robert Kisteleki RIPE NCC R&D

1 0

probe resolution, overhead, or ...?
by Randy Bush 20 Jun '12

20 Jun '12

we want to use atlas probes in an experiment. being prudent (you can tell it was not i), we decided to try to get some basic calibration. one run was just on a local LAN. three hosts on the same gige switch o probe 2285 o psg.com, a not very fancy or fast freebsd 9 box with intel/pro1000 gige ports o bbgp.psg.com, a funky older freebsd 9 box with bge gige probe 2285 pinging bbgp.psg.com, average RTT: 1.5606994382 [0], number of pings: 356*3 psg.com pinging bbgp.psg.com, average RTT: 0.253424332344 [0], number of pings: 674 has anyone done similar probe calibration experiments? does anyone have any clue as to why the difference? randy [0] - my favorite precision joke A gentleman accosts a guard in the museum and asks, "How old is that mummy?" The guard responds, "I believe it is 2005 years old." The gentleman asks "Why that particular age, 2005?" The guard responds "Well, I was told it was 2000 years old when I started work here five years ago."

4 7

Changes to RIPE Atlas raw data structures
by Ann Barcomb 20 Jun '12

20 Jun '12

Hi, We are planning on updating RIPE Atlas probe firmware, which will lead to some changes in the raw data structures. An article about this has been posted on Labs: https://labs.ripe.net/Members/emileaben/ripe-atlas-data-structure-changes We don't plan to announce these changes to this list in the future, because this list is for a more general audience and this information may not be of general interest. Instead, we have created an RSS feed for these types of announcements: https://atlas.ripe.net/atlas/feed/ Kind Regards, Ann -- Ann Barcomb RIPE NCC Community Builder http://www.ripe.net Measurements Community Building +31 20 535 4444

7 8

Feature-suggestion: "round-robin" probes
by Alexander Mayrhofer 11 Jun '12

11 Jun '12

Hello, i'm figuring how RIPE atlas could be most useful for assisting in monitoring our Ancast Network, and came up with the following idea: The Atlas network has a big advantage over other monitoring /measurement networks, which is obviously its sheer size (and topological diversity). Rather than using the Atlas network for pure performance measurements, i would love to be able to use Atlas for reachability measurements (and understand which Anycast location attracts traffic from which region, and how this changes over time). These reachability / topology discovery measurements do not need to be nearly as frequent as the performance measurements, but should utilize all available probes. So, instead of being able to use 10 probes to run a continous performance test (say, DNS query every 300 seconds), i would rather like to be able to use a very high number of probes (best case: "all"), but have each of the probe eg. perform just one traceroute per day (or, even once per week would be enough). This would give me an excellent overview about the topology, but is not possible using the current limits of the UDMs. However, instead of allowing users to allocate measurements to a much higher number of probes, this functionality would also be possible be adding some "probe round-robin" feature to the control infrastructure, for example "randomly allocate a new set of probes every xx seconds". If that feature would exist, i could implement the above reachability test with the following parameters: Test: traceroute Number of probes: 10 Measurement interval: 3600 Swap probe-set interval: 10800 (NEW feature) (which would re-allocate new probes every 3 hours, theoretically working through all 1500 probes about every month?). An obvious alternative would be functionality where i could "queue" "single-shot" measurements for the whole network (since chances are low i would get every probe if they are randomly assigned). comments? Suggestions? Alternatives? Alex Mayrhofer Head of R&D nic.at

5 13