Peering vs. Transit. Adnan Ahmed University of Iowa. University of Iowa

Transcription

1 Peering vs. Transit Adnan Ahmed

2 Introduction Transit Provides connectivity to the Internet Traffic volume based fees Peering Bilateral exchange Settlement-free (no fee) 1. Introduction

3 Related work Interconnection strategies in peering ecosystem Agent-based analysis [Lodhi-Dhamdhere, SIGMETRICS 12] Open-peering [Lodhi et al., Infocom 14] Game-theoretic models [Accongiagioco et al., IFIP 14][Badasyan-Chakrabarti, Telecommunications Policy 08] Complexities in decision making [Lodhi et al., Infocom 15] Evolution of peering and topological Impact Network model [Dhamdhere-Dovrolis, CoNEXT 10] Remote peering [Castro et al., CoNEXT 14] IXP study [Ager et al., SIGCOMM 12] PeeringDB analysis [Lodhi et al., SIGCOMM CCR 14] Our focus Large-scale measurement based performance comparison 2. Related work

4 Methodology Throughput measurements Strain the network Delay measurements using ICMP packet probing Rate limiting at ISPs Our approach HTTP based end-to-end delay measurements 3. Methodology

5 The big picture 4. The big picture

6 The big picture 4. The big picture

7 The big picture 4. The big picture

8 Our approach 5. Our approach

9 Our approach 5. Our approach

10 Our approach 5. Our approach

11 Our approach 5. Our approach

12 Our approach 5. Our approach

13 Data collection A commercial CDN Collected across PoPs at 19 IXPs 1M measurements ~350K clients 360 Autonomous systems 6. Data collection

14 Peering vs Transit 7. Peering vs Transit

15 Peering vs Transit 7. Peering vs Transit

16 Peering vs Transit 7. Peering vs Transit

17 Peering vs Transit 7. Peering vs Transit

18 RTT components 8. RTT components

19 RTT components Transmission ~ 0 small size of pixel tag 8. RTT components

20 RTT components Transmission ~ 0 small size of pixel tag RTT ~ Propagation delay + Queueing delay 8. RTT components

21 RTT components RTT measurements over time 8. RTT components

22 RTT components Diurnal pattern RTT measurements over time 8. RTT components

23 RTT components Diurnal pattern Time series latency pings 8. RTT components

24 RTT components Diurnal pattern Time series latency pings 8. RTT components

25 RTT components Diurnal pattern Time series latency pings Propagation delay < RTT min 8. RTT components

26 RTT components Diurnal pattern Time series latency pings Propagation delay < RTT min 8. RTT components

27 RTT components Diurnal pattern Time series latency pings Propagation delay < RTT min 8. RTT components

28 RTT components Diurnal pattern Time series latency pings Propagation delay < RTT min Maximum queueing delay ~ RTT max - RTT min 8. RTT components

29 Propagation and Queueing delays 9. Propagation and Queueing delays

30 Propagation and Queueing delays Peering is better 9. Propagation and Queueing delays

31 Propagation and Queueing delays Transit is better 9. Propagation and Queueing delays

32 Propagation and Queueing delays II I III IV 9. Propagation and Queueing delays

33 Propagation and Queueing delays II I III IV 9. Propagation and Queueing delays

34 Propagation and Queueing delays II I III IV 9. Propagation and Queueing delays

35 Path length comparison 10. Path length comparison

36 Path length comparison 10. Path length comparison

37 Path length comparison Shorter path length via peering 10. Path length comparison

38 Conclusion Peering generally outperforms transit for a majority of clients Peering almost always has better propagation delays Shorter path lengths for peering Transit sometimes has better queueing delays Under-provisioned peering paths 11. Conclusion