1 / 12

Measurements of Internet performance for NIIT, Pakistan Jan – Feb 2004

PingER. Measurements of Internet performance for NIIT, Pakistan Jan – Feb 2004. From Les Cottrell, SLAC For presentation by Prof. Arshad Ali, NIIT. PingER. Results: Worldwide performance. Performance is improving Developed world improving factor of 10 in 4-5 years

dylan
Download Presentation

Measurements of Internet performance for NIIT, Pakistan Jan – Feb 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PingER Measurements of Internet performance for NIIT, Pakistan Jan – Feb 2004 From Les Cottrell, SLAC For presentation by Prof. Arshad Ali, NIIT PingER

  2. Results: Worldwide performance • Performance is improving • Developed world improving factor of 10 in 4-5 years • S.E. Europe, C.AsiaRussia, catching up • India & Africa worse off & falling behind • Developing world 3-10 years behind • Many institutes in developing world have less performance than a household in N. America or Europe!!

  3. To Pakistan performance Routes: ESnet (hops 3-8) - DC ATT (9-21) - Karachi Karachi NIIT/Rawalpindi Routes: ESnet (hops 3-6) - SNV SINGTEL (7-12) - Karachi Pakistan Telecom Karachi Rawalpindi Loss % Islamabad RTT ms Routes: ESnet (hops 3-6) - SNV SINGTEL (7-12) - Karachi Pakistan Telecom Karachi Lahore Lahore

  4. From Pakistan Performance Route: Pakistan Telecom (2-5) Rawalpindi, Karachi SingTel (6-10) ESnet (11-14) - PAIX NIIT to SLAC Route: Pakistan Telecom (2-5) Rawalpindi, Karachi Concert (6-9) London DataTAG (11-12) .de NIIT to CERN Note similarities, probably due to common bottleneck, probably in Pakistan

  5. NIIT performance from U.S. (SLAC) Preliminary results, started measurements end Dec 2003. Nb. Heavy losses during congested day-times Avg daily: loss~1-2%, RTT~320ms Ping RTT & Loss Bandwidth measurements using packet pair dispersion & TCP (Jan 2004) abing (pkt-pair dispersion):Average To NIIT: ~350Kbits/s From NIIT: ~365 Kbits/s Iperf/TCP (with SLAC): Average: To NIIT: ~320Kbits/s From NIIT: ~330Kbits/s Iperf/TCP (with CERN): Average: To NIIT: ~270Kbits/s From NIIT: ~300Kbits/s Can also derive throughput (assuming standard TCP) from RTT & loss (monthly) using: BW~1.2*S(1460B)/(RTT*sqrt(loss)  ~ 260Kbits/s (SLAC to NIIT) ~ 630Kbits/s (NIIT to SLAC | CERN) Nominal path bottleneck capacity 364 Kbits/s

  6. Available Bandwidth (Feb ‘04 after upgrade) • green line is the bandwidth capacity of current bottleneck • deduced from the minimum packet separation • blue line is available bandwidth = capacity-cross-traffic. • Use available bandwidth estimator (abing) • Uses packet pair dispersion • Low impact, 40*1450Byte packets • Repeat once/minute • Client at SLAC, mirror/server at NIIT • Iperf confirms with: • 948Kbps (2streams), • 952Kbps (4streams), • 1042Kbps (10streams)

  7. To NCP Pakistan • Cannot use PingER to measure to ncp.edu.pk • Pings blocked at FLAG router (62.216.145.154, AS15412) on way to Comsats (Pakistani ISP) • Working with NCP to try and resolve • Trying to contact FLAG • Using abing instead • Indicates 2Mbps • But link is 384Kbps • Iperf shows 235 - 245 Kbps • Rate limiting or shaping? ~ 2MBits/s, but link is 384Kbps Looking for discrepancy

  8. Within Pakistan • SLAC – Karachi U: • ESnet (hops 3-8) – DC ATT (9-21) – Karachi • SLAC – NIIT RawalpindiI: • ESnet (hops 3-6) – SNV, SINGTEL (7-12) – Karachi, Pakistan Telecom Karachi-Rawalpindi • SLAC - U Lahore, similar to NIIT • SLAC – NSC: • ESnet (hops 1-6), C&W (7-11) Santa Clara – NY, FLAG (12-16) NY – London – Karlsruhe, Comsats • NIIT – NSC (Rawalpindi – Islamabad) few miles apart, • No peering in Pakistan, can this be changed? • Route goes via England: • PIE (hops 1-5), Concert (6-9)- London, FLAG (10-14) London – Karachi, Comsats (15) • Takes longer than to SLAC

  9. Conclusions • Big performance differences to sites, depend on ISP (at least 3 ISPs seen for Pakistan A&R sites) • To NIIT: • Before upgrade got about 300Kbps - 380Kbps at best • After upgrade get 1 Mbps, as expected • The bottleneck appears to be in Pakistan • There is often congestion (packet loss & extended RTTs) during busy periods each weekday • Video will probably be sensitive to packet loss, so it may depend on the time of day • H.323 (typically needs 384Kbps + 64Kbps), would appear to have been be marginal at best before upgrade, since upgrade has been very successful. • No peering Pakistan between NIIT and NSC

  10. Bulk Data Transfer • Transfer time to send a file of various sizes between 2 sites with given capacity • assume can utilize 50% of capacity • format hours:mins:seconds File size Typical BaBar file sizes 500MB-1GB PingER

  11. Interactive Use • Voice needs RTT < 250ms or else listener does not know when to speak • RTT > 400ms makes productive interactive work such as interactive telnet/X-windows style typing difficult • Screen does not match the keyboard, especially when correcting text • Losses: • Losses > 10% TCP connections fail • Losses >4-6% make video conferencing unintelligible for non-native language speakers • Losses of > 3-5% make TCP perform badly • Random loss of 2.5% will make Voice over IP annoying every 30 seconds or so • More realistic burst losses will cause VoIP to be annoying at >1% losses PingER

  12. More information • NUST Institute of Information Technology (NIIT) • http://www.niit.edu.pk/ • PingER project • http://www-iepm.slac.stanford.edu/pinger/ • ABwE available bandwidth estimator • www-iepm.slac.stanford.edu/bw/abwe/abwe-cf-iperf.html

More Related