Subject: RE: [IMRG] Measurement TCPs

From: "Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 19:05:15 -0500

> > How will be able to build a measurements community when the "raw
> > material" of our work (i.e., traces) is only available to a 
> few research
> > labs?

As we all know most of the BGP data is  archived and got from
oregon, RIPE and geoff's pages. It is difficult for service 
providers to give such data for intra-domain stuff. But, they 
can always remove/filter sensitive details and put on a public 
server. 

Other possibilities:

1. we can form a measurement repository with the help of caida,
or any other lab and submit our data (on which  one's research 
work is based) to them.

2. Service providers can put their data in a public server after
proning sensitive details. Sprintlabs page on data analysis
is starting point to such a initiative. 

3. Universities can share their data through their lab pages like
MIT LCS lab intiative (http://bgp.lcs.mit.edu/)

or

we should make it a condition that all measurement related paper's 
published by SIGCOMM has to submit their data to 
http://www.acm.org/sigcomm/ITA/index.html :-)

But, again it depends on what type of information one prefers. If it
is some kind of VoIP quality testing, it is pretty difficult.

> a lot of cool stuff (not everything, i agree) can be done from the
> sidelines (as you demonstrated in your sigcomm talk), and 
> that is actually
> part of the fun and challenge in measurement work.

It might be a case for BGP and some of the active measurement stuff. 
But, one has to accept Constantinos views for getting/sharing some 
of intra-domain data and product oreinted traces (VoIP etc.) Hope you
remember that i have contacted you once for a particular data and your
response:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ratul Mahajan [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2002 10:03 PM
> To: Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student)
> Subject: Re: BGP/nanog
> 
> we never got into archiving traffic. not aware of anyone else who 
> does and shares. 
_______________________________________________
IMRG mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imrg

---

From: Mark Allman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 23:02:40 -0400

> [...]

Amen!

Although, the current ITA is not terribly scableable.  For instance,
if we got a whole lot of measurements in there they are terribly
searchable.  And, there is no standard set of meta-data for the
measurements, so that enough context is present for others to use
the data.

Ethan Blanton, Wes Eddy and I threw together a strawman for a
scableable system for sharing measurement data in the community.
There are lots of issues involved.  I think the key is to get the
meta-data right about the measurements so we can all form useful
searches and we all have enough context to analyze the data in
different and useful ways.

I'd love this group to hash over our proposal.  And, we're not
claiming we got everything right.  We simply wanted to start a
discussion within the community (with a somewhat reasonable
proposal).  The paper is:

    Mark Allman, Ethan Blanton, Wesley Eddy. A Scalable System for
    Sharing Internet Measurements. Proceedings of the Passive and
    Active Measurement Workshop, March 2002.
    http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~mallman/papers/simr-pam2002.ps

allman

--
Mark Allman -- NASA GRC/BBN -- http://roland.grc.nasa.gov/~mallman/
_______________________________________________
IMRG mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imrg

---

From: Jambi Ganbar <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 10:48:32 -0400 (EDT)

> > > material" of our work (i.e., traces) is only available to a

In order to have raw material it will
probably be useful to agree on a common
format for the material.

 > Other
possibilities: >
> or any other lab and submit our data (on which  one's research

We will need a lot of funding for this
kind of effort.  At speeds that some of
us collect raw data on a 2GB file is a
matter of a few minutes at best.

[snip]

> http://www.acm.org/sigcomm/ITA/index.html :-)

Not providing raw data for paper
submission does not invalidate the
research.  I believe that at the end we
are interested in results not data and a
paper accepted to SIGCOMM I hope will
get scrutinized based on the results not
the lack of raw data.

Jambi
vBNS Engineering.

---

From: Rolf Riedi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2002 12:19:51 -0500

> > > material" of our work (i.e., traces) is only available to a

This is a relevant issue.

Making all data ever used in papers is desirable since it allows
comparison. Yet I would suggest to consider that this would form
a pool of "classical sets" with the community maybe focussing too
much on those traces. Also, making publication of data compulsory for
publication of papers could prevent certain institutes to contribute to
research and the community would not hear about lessons learned
from "sensitive data", which is useful even if the actual data is not
available.

Best

    Rolf

--
Rudolf Riedi | Rice Univ. MS 380 | Houston TX 77005-1892
www.ece.rice.edu/~riedi | voice (713)348 3020 | fax 6196