Beyond getting acquainted with a new dataset? I'm a transit network that
supports, among other traffic types, science flows. I think new monitoring
methods can help identify targets for intervention.

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021, 4:06 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@toke.dk> wrote:

> TJason Iannone <jason.iannone@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I ended up cloning the pping repo and running make locally.
> >
> > Installing was a few steps:
> >
> > 1. mkdir ~/src/libtins/build
> > 2. cd ~/src/libtins/build
> > 2. git clone https://github.com/mfontanini/libtins.git
> > 3. make
> > 4. sudo make install
> > 5. cd ~/src
> > 6. git clone https://github.com/pollere/pping.git
> > 7. cd pping
> > 8. make
> > 9. ./pping
> >
> > The promise of this, as Kathleen Nichols points out, is that we can
> > 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.
>
> What's your use case? :)
>
> -Toke
>