Deferred Peerings as Obstacles on the Internet Thomas Rieder - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
deferred peerings as obstacles on the internet
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Deferred Peerings as Obstacles on the Internet Thomas Rieder - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sep 29, 2023 19 likes •420 views

Deferred Peerings as Obstacles on the Internet Thomas Rieder HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO Discussion Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Conclusion Motivation Pe Peering : Direct connection between two networks on the Internet

slide-1
SLIDE 1

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Deferred Peerings as Obstacles on the Internet

Thomas Rieder

slide-2
SLIDE 2

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Motivation

Pe Peering: Direct connection between two networks on the Internet (“interconnection”) → Defines the topology of the Internet → Goal is better connection quality or redundancy Ne Net neut neutrality: provider deliberately slows down traffic Pe Peering: provider decides against speeding it up

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-3
SLIDE 3

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Motivation

Peering is settlement-free Minimal setup effort Basically no technical / economical reason not to do it → Some providers still decide against it Go Goal al: identify those providers and their reasons

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-4
SLIDE 4

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Fundamentals

Autonomous Systems Structure of the Internet Different network tiers Internet Exchange Points BGP RIPE Atlas

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-5
SLIDE 5

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Autonomous System

“Network” on the Internet Entity that routing is based on Uniquely identified by Autonomous System Number (ASN) Handed out by Regional Internet Registries (RIR) Consists of multiple IP prefixes

192.189.51.0/24 192.189.53.0/24

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-6
SLIDE 6

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Autonomous System

“Network” on the Internet Entity that routing is based on Uniquely identified by Autonomous System Number (ASN) Handed out by Regional Internet Registries (RIR) Consists of multiple IP prefixes Mapping IP ↔ ASN via WHOIS or RDAP

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-7
SLIDE 7

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-8
SLIDE 8

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-9
SLIDE 9

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-10
SLIDE 10

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet - IXP

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-11
SLIDE 11

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-12
SLIDE 12

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-13
SLIDE 13

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)

Routing protocol of the Internet Determines how to get packets to the target network Operates on paths → computes single-source shortest path to all other AS No Non-publ public routing policies for political / economical / operational constraints

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-14
SLIDE 14

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

RIPE Atlas

We want to analyze multiple ISPs It’s unfeasible to lease a connection from every single one → RI RIPE Atl tlas: global Internet measurement network with 9,000 probes → Allows us to do traceroute measurements from a lot of different sources

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-15
SLIDE 15

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

RIPE Atlas - Probes

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-16
SLIDE 16

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-17
SLIDE 17

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Available at https://peering.rieder.io

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-18
SLIDE 18

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Methodology

Focus on a single country at a time Execute traceroutes from the RIPE Atlas probes Checks the resulting paths for hops that indicate peering Ta Target: Content Servers (ISP Speed Index)

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-19
SLIDE 19

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Methodology – Peering Graphs

Construct graphs among all networks in a single country Good for analyzing the general approach to peering → traceroutes among all probes

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-20
SLIDE 20

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Discussion: Austria

Only one IXP: Vienna Internet Exchange Not all networks have probes 32 out of 65 networks peer understandable for company networks → We focus on the large consumer networks

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-21
SLIDE 21

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Austria – Peering with

Ap April Ma May Ju June Ju July Au August A1 3.42 3.36 3.45 3.47 3.52 CableLink 3.92 3.93 3.86 3.72 3.82 Kabelplus 4.15 4.13 4.15 4.18 4.24 LIWEST 4.18 4.12 4.13 4.21 4.28 Tele2 2.99 2.96 2.92 2.96 3.01 UPC 2.70 3.07 3.75 3.94 3.98 Peering No Peering No Data Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion Al All va values ar are th the co connection sp speed in in Mb Mbps

slide-22
SLIDE 22

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Austria – UPC

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-23
SLIDE 23

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Origin Network Transit Network Client Network

slide-24
SLIDE 24

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Austria – A1

Only major ISP that refuses to peer No aversion to peering in general They are present at the Vienna Internet Exchange Run Video-On-Demand service themselves

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-25
SLIDE 25

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Discussion: Italy

Two IXPs: Milan and Turin Internet quality is generally not as good as in Austria Netflix is rather new in Italy (October 2015) 33 out of 65 networks peer Layer 2 peering likely

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-26
SLIDE 26

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Origin Network Transit Network Client Network

slide-27
SLIDE 27

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Discussion: The Netherlands

By far the best Internet quality Some of the biggest IXP in the world in Amsterdam (by traffic) → Gateway between North America and Europe Only 19 out of 64 networks peer Again: layer 2 peering likely (extremely low latencies)

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-28
SLIDE 28

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

The Netherlands – Peering with

Ap April Ma May Ju June Ju July Au August Caiway 4.07 4.03 3.98 4.02 3.98 Ziggo 3.95 3.9 3.87 3.92 3.90 UPC 3.91 3.86 3.85 3.92 3.89 ZeelandNet 3.91 3.93 3.89 3.85 3.81 KPN 3.8 3.8 3.74 3.84 3.82 Xs4all 3.78 3.75 3.73 3.77 3.75 Online 3.48 3.4 3.35 3.41 3.39 Tele2 3.43 3.35 3.36 3.4 3.42 Peering No Peering No Data Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion Al All va values ar are th the co connection sp speed in in Mb Mbps

slide-29
SLIDE 29

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Conclusion

Peering can have a big impact on performance (up to 47%) RIPE Atlas allows us to measure it Caveat: Layer 2 peering can only be inferred from the latency No reason not to peer Some companies still refuse to peer in order to promote their own services Opposed to net neutrality it’s more a sin of omission rather than direct manipulation

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-30
SLIDE 30

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Thank You!

Thomas Rieder

slide-31
SLIDE 31

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Motivation

Peering affects how fast content can be delivered to users Similar to net neutrality, but works differently Ne Net neutrality: provider deliberately slows down traffic Pe Peering: provider decides against speeding it up

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-32
SLIDE 32

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion Pr Private Interco connect

slide-33
SLIDE 33

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

RIPE Atlas - Coverage

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-34
SLIDE 34

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

RIPE Atlas - Features

Allows us to do traceroute measurements from a lot of different sources Based on a credit-system We need to earn credits first Limits how many measurements we can do

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-35
SLIDE 35

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

slide-36
SLIDE 36

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Origin Network Transit Network Client Network

slide-37
SLIDE 37

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet – Route Servers

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-38
SLIDE 38

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Structure of the Internet – Route Servers

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-39
SLIDE 39

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Agenda

Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion

slide-40
SLIDE 40

HTTPS://PEERING.RIEDER.IO

Italy – Peering with

Ap April Ma May Ju June Ju July Au August EOLO – NGI 2.87 2.85 2.9 2.88 2.97 Fastweb 3.34 3.3 3.31 3.42 3.44 Linkem 2.13 2.17 2.26 2.46 2.49 Telecom Italia 3.17 3.15 3.09 3.11 3.13 Tiscali 3.16 3.07 3.12 3.18 3.18 Vodafone 3.26 3.29 3.28 3.35 3.36 Vodafone TeleTu 2.67 2.58 2.59 2.61 2.59 Wind 3.14 3.12 3.1 3.11 3.12 Peering No Peering No Data Motivation Fundamentals Design Methodology Discussion Conclusion Al All va values ar are th the co connection sp speed in in Mb Mbps