160 likes | 260 Views
Measuring DNS services at APNIC A work-in-progress report. Reverse DNS SIG APRICOT, Bangkok 5 March 2002. Overview. Motivations Methodology Initial outcomes Future work Questions. Motivations. Improve APNIC reporting function EC response to member survey
E N D
Measuring DNS services at APNICA work-in-progress report Reverse DNS SIG APRICOT, Bangkok 5 March 2002
Overview • Motivations • Methodology • Initial outcomes • Future work • Questions
Motivations • Improve APNIC reporting function • EC response to member survey • Strategic regional/national relevancy • DNS traffic reflects end-user usage • DNS efficiencies affect global service quality • Improve monitoring of APNIC services • Check load balance between servers, locations • Early warning of problems • Review load balance when network changes, new services added
Methodology • APNIC DNS nameservers sampled every 15 minutes • currently approx 8-10Mb named.run • dumps saved as compressed images for future use # ndc debug;sleep 60; ndc nodebug
Methodology cont. • Analyse sample • Requestors • Source of datagrams • Requested objects • .in-addr.arpa • .ip6.int, etc • Collate using RIR allocation maps • Tag data by ISO CC of nearest allocation boundary • Can sort by volume of requests, CC etc.
RIR Map Issues • Network licenceholders can use the network anywhere • CC of allocation/assignment record • Not authoritative source CC of request. • 80:20 rule on likely location of network? • Many legacy networks list as US but are located worldwide • Too many addresses unknown CC
Initial Outcomes • Example load shares • To Brisbane and Tokyo • CN/TW • ID/HK • NZ/KR • Query rates • 2 week sample • IPv6 query rate • Top 10 requesting CC by server location
Top 20 requesting CC by server location Australia Japan
Future Work • Table of CC to requested DNS RR • More computationally expensive • May not be completely accurate • Web ‘select-your-own-CC’ interface • Apply same methodology • Web • Whois • requester,requested-data inline in logfiles, so much simpler to tabulate • Consistent methodology for monitoring APNIC resource usage
Future Work cont. • Account for measurement-induced errors • Additional cost to DNS server to write named.run file • Is named logging ‘cheaper’ ? • Avoid methods which query (www,whois,dns) • Improve methodology • Use DNS logging not debug dumps • Make data available online • APNIC values interpretation of raw data by the wider community
Questions George Michaelson ggm@apnic.net