From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x232.google.com (mail-qk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B56C3B25D for ; Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:43:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x232.google.com with SMTP id t7so215663037qkh.1 for ; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 05:43:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date:references:to :message-id:mime-version; bh=Mn9OVUXMU0qjfMTgzAYhpkWvCAkp8Ot5ejWmVoQt4qg=; b=BMo2mODu4XQphRZe2pSbZfKSsh5OtF2ctC0+PTj/cxQrsfvCJISwqdo8R0ADtp2bWW ePGx8uR0GM1Q9LP5D0yPcrI0HqT8CCOYKuyRVCzjrgjxqGhouBKE5yKT0Hh9kIRqoWfE pgCIeIggDR1p1eyj2GYGKVOlghJV2RCT2FMrK/QQOVwbUe0sOJs2vF7j5uxgoSQJI0Zl 0XPWzRHLFQdxi7mWghtcsCxvaXO1/ZdUCTEzeUcYmtze1bqq4HNyNFQd/CdWZHIqZQii yaejRCEl6nmIus+m3FBj1pMkSKfy+5dz953DPPMwfZACVtlijDt9cXXDQRMnOTMX4Zll Silg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:subject:date :references:to:message-id:mime-version; bh=Mn9OVUXMU0qjfMTgzAYhpkWvCAkp8Ot5ejWmVoQt4qg=; b=PKuLcG13n7+CqN4HkScEOU67nm/U6xoeHTiMHP+BPymevp+pBS3RZ+WAZiq2uIwFXn mHbVpPugTQ7PZ1lwmht75bW1Kd7Bjziwv/0ht8RwBli8ZVG6YTz+LlOS6RDOsueRiUid IKqgdysMkmGDJVOBcXI+cxSLQ9ETipGGtkDvvxfFClqICZwsYJb7TAqVj3azeQENRQhT TUcy35+DcKVlYM+/puHZdx8bdDvvGD8uN3CgQXKlk0eduYXVPBiNCxARjtvOLt7g/Ovh 4vVqdLDV8+Sp0F2NuPrv/DksN+/9iqfuw7d0LvQa8g5dFZ7jTITVnm81mSIdpf8N2VXQ aoxQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPi0GGfv//7MLo8z0+4p9PTZrMW5FbavKfeHvv1O+l/mQSis8CVj9BjPyLjE1FNiw== X-Received: by 10.55.155.78 with SMTP id d75mr10641363qke.156.1473165829726; Tue, 06 Sep 2016 05:43:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from richs-mbp-4818.lan (pool-70-16-106-139.port.east.myfairpoint.net. [70.16.106.139]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5sm16026011qkk.28.2016.09.06.05.43.48 for (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 06 Sep 2016 05:43:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Rich Brown Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:43:47 -0400 References: To: bloat Message-Id: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2104\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2104) Subject: [Bloat] Fwd: Measuring Web Similarity from Dual-stacked Hosts X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2016 12:43:50 -0000 The following came from the NANOG list. It's IPv6 data, not performance = info, but it's nice that we're getting mileage from the SamKnows = infrastructure... Rich > Begin forwarded message: >=20 > From: nanog-request@nanog.org > Subject: NANOG Digest, Vol 104, Issue 5 > Date: September 6, 2016 at 8:00:01 AM EDT > To: nanog@nanog.org > Reply-To: nanog@nanog.org >=20 > Send NANOG mailing list submissions to > nanog@nanog.org >=20 > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > nanog-request@nanog.org >=20 > You can reach the person managing the list at > nanog-owner@nanog.org >=20 > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of NANOG digest..." >=20 >=20 > Today's Topics: >=20 > 1. measuring web similarity from dual-stacked hosts =20 > (Bajpai, Vaibhav) >=20 >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >=20 > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 12:36:35 +0000 > From: "Bajpai, Vaibhav" > To: "nanog@nanog.org" > Subject: measuring web similarity from dual-stacked hosts =20 > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3D"utf-8" >=20 > Dear NANOG, >=20 > Measuring Web Similarity from Dual-stacked Hosts > ------------------------------------------------ >=20 > How similar are the webpages accessed over IPv6 to their IPv4 = counterparts? ? > In situations where the content is dissimilar over IPv4 and IPv6, what = factors > contribute to the dissimilarity? >=20 > To answer ^ we developed a tool (simweb) and deployed it on 80 = geographically > distributed dual-stacked SamKnows probes. A paper presenting results = from the > collected dataset got accepted recently. We just released the tool and = the > paper [a]. Thought to share it along. >=20 > [a] http://goo.gl/sAsDcG >=20 > Feedback most welcome! > You may recall a presentation of this work at RIPE 72 [b]. >=20 > [b] https://ripe72.ripe.net/archives/video/126 >=20 > Abstract > -------- >=20 > We compare the similarity of webpages delivered over IPv4 and IPv6. = Using the > SamKnows web performance (webget) test, we implemented an extension = (simweb) > that allows us to measure the similarity of webpages. The simweb test = measures > against ALEXA top 100 dual-stacked websites from 80 SamKnows probes = connected > to dual-stacked networks representing 58 different ASes. Using a two > months-long dataset we show that 14% of these dual-stacked websites = exhibit a > dissimilarity in the number of fetched webpage elements, with 94% of = them > exhibiting a dissimilarity in their size. We show that 6% of these = websites > announce AAAA entries in the DNS but no content is delivered over IPv6 = when an > HTTP request is made. We also noticed several cases where not all = webpage > elements (such as images, javascript and CSS) of a dual-stacked = website are > available over IPv6. We show that 27% of the dual-stacked websites = have some > fraction of webpage elements that fail over IPv6, with 9% of the = websites > having more than 50% webpage elements that fail over IPv6. We perform = a > causality analysis and also identify sources for these failing = elements. We > show that 12% of these websites have more than 50% webpage elements = that > belong to the same origin source and fail over IPv6. Failure rates are = largely > affected by DNS resolution error on images, javascript and CSS content > delivered from both same-origin and cross-origin sources. These = failures tend > to cripple experience for users behind an IPv6-only network and a > quantification of failure cases may help improve IPv6 adoption on the = Internet. >=20 > -- Vaibhav >=20 > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > Vaibhav Bajpai > www.vaibhavbajpai.com >=20 > Postdoctoral Researcher > Jacobs University Bremen, Germany > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D >=20 > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: signature.asc > Type: application/pgp-signature > Size: 496 bytes > Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail > URL: = >=20 > End of NANOG Digest, Vol 104, Issue 5 > *************************************