Improving accuracy in end-to-end packet loss measurement

被引:66
作者
Sommers, J [1 ]
Duffield, N [1 ]
Barford, P [1 ]
Ron, A [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706 USA
关键词
active measurement; BADABING; network congestion; network probes; packet loss;
D O I
10.1145/1090191.1080111
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 ;
摘要
Measurement and estimation of packet loss characteristics are challenging due to the relatively rare occurrence and typically short duration of packet loss episodes. While active probe tools are commonly used to measure packet loss on end-to-end paths, there has been little analysis of the accuracy of these tools or their impact on the network. The objective of our study is to understand how to measure packet loss episodes accurately with end-to-end probes. We begin by testing the capability of standard Poisson-modulated end-to-end measurements of loss in a controlled laboratory environment using IP routers and commodity end hosts. Our tests show that loss characteristics reported from such Poisson-modulated probe tools can be quite inaccurate over a range of traffic conditions. Motivated by these observations, we introduce a new algorithm for packet loss measurement that is designed to overcome the deficiencies in standard Poisson-based tools. Specifically, our method creates a probe process that (1) enables an explicit trade-off between accuracy and impact on the network, and (2) enables more accurate measurements than standard Poisson probing at the same rate. We evaluate the capabilities of our methodology experimentally by developing and implementing a prototype tool, called BADABING. The experiments demonstrate the trade-offs between impact on the network and measurement accuracy. We show that BADABING reports loss characteristics far more accurately than traditional loss measurement tools.
引用
收藏
页码:157 / 168
页数:12
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
ALMES G, 1999, 2680 IETF RFC
[2]  
ALOUF S, 2000, P IEEE INFOCOM 00 TE
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2018 IETF RFC
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1998, IEEE NETWORK
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1997, COMPUTER COMMUNICATI
[6]  
APPENZELLER G, 2004, P ACM SIGCOMM 04 POR
[7]  
BARFORD P, 2004, IEEE INTERNET CO SEP
[8]  
BENKO P, 2002, P IEEE GLOBECOM 02 T
[9]  
BOLOT J, 1993, P ACM SIGCOMM 93 SAN
[10]  
BRUMELLE S, 1971, J APPL PROBABILITY, V8