From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x633.google.com (mail-ej1-x633.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::633]) (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 D5FF93B29E for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 20:36:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ej1-x633.google.com with SMTP id n20so17778848ejb.5 for ; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 17:36:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SLnhGjzMiBMhhPc3VNKOoB27DbjJA9A5htXm3t1AVl8=; b=f8mOFK5+uQN4mMZJjN/NZ0Dimcr2U2R6DeHpoS6dOMtzupA4kHcLmBQGfQMA2YrGV4 +MD0jlKiJZiy8Q3fD6P5Ox2xzRXo1YDOje+D2rapkov3gDh0/KmhnxHOaSS6SGGPNcoe /2jumAZR6e5taykt935GI5gFb3K1DGYTtWWgCfLHWCd3BuuEJeWDI05EmoyDVkbJOCam vO6VGb+iogkZ+C5+DM7BCfF094NnzwptQyCUq8Y9ZHn1wNO3EVUyPCbzoIvAGGjvnOI5 FdI16ZSOIYqWhAz5nuBu3oqXQP/TCLNpxCdAfsTvFpuA6lXxJinvHvFv2bH7/B50Yo/i jKXQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SLnhGjzMiBMhhPc3VNKOoB27DbjJA9A5htXm3t1AVl8=; b=GEDTNhfkgv+4ano6olodPkW9Le+JCxNRuKmNgtqb53xIhMB8mgwkUAk8gqIo5r+Tup ohkKOjDvCRr5amQhLJtdQ4ZhvZHMixYIA7+Uhyj353MvREfz+ZFvqCIERDDxWOgQ69lH TsjnNi1oQ+wJexd1Eie/cxiHMhxkU7JRZK13aFpjGX1gj8CTlxNZ/9TFxuF9tpwkIbwV kf03bsMxhD2i1AUbTRFDQmQqzFE66fNwQtnv659/GymaBt2XEsMkATzr4iuzysRkzFgn OSjg/HK/cpLDEPGu+P0TwgzHm52r4OCcfXotXSnD4ehkDj04fEy9Bd5tFJbiGNmOI8zp 8dhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530qX7tgd4xQLRIy9KpYTB5gZVSsH8gIo++MolhJ/vcZT+DEaUEJ 9MCeKe8OIqF+DMxVVOYkDAnCS28rnlLWUduTy13i/cgm X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwVU/1Cuw7EiXnryCEittlohqkDNGVy6yp1ykEnyYyXn4VWyQ9p02j5i6abOHTiKl8yfzUhPvf3ghmzLfYZFbE= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:cc92:: with SMTP id oq18mr5979984ejb.465.1614389797760; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 17:36:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87a6rs145a.fsf@toke.dk> <293de1cf-ae10-5e77-81ba-59599cc6ef86@pollere.net> In-Reply-To: <293de1cf-ae10-5e77-81ba-59599cc6ef86@pollere.net> From: Jason Iannone Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 20:36:26 -0500 Message-ID: To: nichols@pollere.net Cc: bloat Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006cb09f05bc476a3d" Subject: Re: [Bloat] Trouble Installing PPing in MacOS 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: Sat, 27 Feb 2021 01:36:39 -0000 --0000000000006cb09f05bc476a3d Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" I watched your presentation at ucla on youtube. I wasn't expecting the talk you ended up giving, but I think your experience is familiar. Poking at data in different ways is interesting and it can be hard to separate the wheat from the chaff. What presentation methods matter? What presentation methods drive useful action? I'm not a data science guy. At my core, I am a plumber. New and interesting ways of visualizing what lives in the pipes can help me target problem areas, the same way you noted with the 7 second delay in the university science network in your presentation. I appreciate the scope of pping. It's small and intentional. Anyway, I dig the intent and the size and I hope to see more of this kind of work. Thanks for replying, Jason On Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 5:16 PM Kathleen Nichols wrote: > On 2/26/21 4:56 AM, Jason Iannone wrote: > ... > > passively monitor production flows to get a novel sense of end to end > > performance per flow. I don't know of any other passive monitoring > > technique, beyond a port mirror + a whole gang of systems, that can > > provide this level of detail. Please enlighten me if I'm wrong. The only > > other passive monitoring mechanisms I'm aware of are SNMP polling, > > IPFIX/*Flow, and Streaming Telemetry Interface. None of those systems > > provide end to end flow performance details. The standard in-band active > > monitoring tools are good for determining node to node and full path > > metrics, but this provides a more complete picture of end to end > > performance beyond active y.1731/802.3ag/OAM probes. I'm a little > > surprised that I'm only learning about it now. > > > > So, I worked on something I call TSDE (Transport Segment Delay > Estimator) that lets you get a (noisy) one-way estimate of delay > variation. I did pping as sort of a side product and as a way to find > the minimum round trip delay since TSDE just gives variation. This was > done under a DOE SBIR and Pollere has a patent on it but I would > consider sharing information if someone wanted to develop an open source > tool. (I feel that my own implementation is kind of fragile as I was > using it to try different ideas for getting a good estimate. And I > haven't done anything with it for several years.) > > Kathie > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat > --0000000000006cb09f05bc476a3d Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I watched your presentation at ucla on youtube. I wasn= 9;t expecting the talk you ended up giving, but I think your experience is = familiar.

Poking at data in di= fferent ways is interesting and it can be hard to separate the wheat from t= he chaff. What presentation methods matter? What presentation methods drive= useful action?

I'm = not a data science guy. At my core, I am a plumber. New and interesting way= s of visualizing what lives in the pipes can help me target problem areas, = the same way you noted with the 7 second delay in the university science ne= twork in your presentation.

I appreciate the scope of pping. It's small and intentional. Anyway= , I dig the intent and the size and I hope to see more of this kind of work= .

Thanks for replying,

Jason=C2=A0
On Fri, = Feb 26, 2021, 5:16 PM Kathleen Nichols <nichols@pollere.net> wrote:
On 2/26/21 4:56 AM, Jason Iannone wrote:
...
> passively monitor production flows to get a novel sense of end to end<= br> > performance per flow. I don't know of any other passive monitoring=
> technique, beyond a port mirror=C2=A0+ a whole gang of systems, that c= an
> provide this level of detail. Please enlighten me if I'm wrong. Th= e only
> other passive monitoring mechanisms I'm aware of are SNMP polling,=
> IPFIX/*Flow, and Streaming Telemetry Interface. None of those systems<= br> > provide end to end flow performance details. The standard in-band acti= ve
> monitoring tools are good for determining node to node and full path > metrics, but this provides a more complete picture of end to end
> performance beyond active y.1731/802.3ag/OAM probes. I'm a little<= br> > surprised that I'm only learning about it now.
>

So, I worked on something I call TSDE (Transport Segment Delay
Estimator) that lets you get a (noisy) one-way estimate of delay
variation. I did pping as sort of a side product and as a way to find
the minimum round trip delay since TSDE just gives variation. This was
done under a DOE SBIR and Pollere has a patent on it but I would
consider sharing information if someone wanted to develop an open source tool. (I feel that my own implementation is kind of fragile as I was
using it to try different ideas for getting a good estimate. And I
haven't done anything with it for several years.)

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Kathie
_______________________________________________
Bloat mailing list
Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat<= /a>
--0000000000006cb09f05bc476a3d--