Internet optometry: assessing the broken glasses in internet reachability

ABSTRACT

Reachability is thought of as the most basic service provided by today's Internet. Unfortunately, this does not imply that the community has a deep understanding of it. Researchers and operators rely on two views of reachability: control/routing- and data-plane measurements, but both types of measurements suffer from biases and limitations. In this paper, we illustrate some of these biases, and show how to design controlled experiments which allow us to "see" through the limitations of previous measurement techniques. For example, we discover the extent of default routing and its impact on reachability. This explains some of the previous unexpected results from studies that compared control- and data-plane measurements.

However, not all limitations of visibility given by routing and probing tools can be compensated for by methodological improvements. We will show in this paper, that some of the limitations can be carefully addressed when designing an experiment, e.g. not seeing the reverse path taken by a probe can be partly compensated for by our methodology, called dual probing. However, compensating for other biases through more measurements may not always be possible. Therefore, calibration of expectations and checks of assumptions are critical when conducting measurements that aim at making conclusions about topological properties of the Internet.

References

1. R. Oliveira, D. Pei, W. Willinger, B. Zhang, and L. Zhang, "In Search of the elusive Ground Truth: The Internet's AS-level Connectivity Structure," in Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS, (Annapolis, USA), June 2008.
2. E. Katz-Bassett, H. Madhyastha, V. Adhikari, A. Krishnamurthy, and T. Anderson, "Reverse traceroute. Under submission, 2009.
3. F. Wang, Z. M. Mao, J. Wang, L. Gao, and R. Bush, "A Measurement Study on the Impact of Routing Events on End-to-End Internet Path Performance," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, 2006.
4. L. Colitti, Internet Topology Discovery Using Active Probing. PhD thesis, University di "Roma Tre", 2006.
5. R. Oliveira and B. Zhang, "IRL - Internet Topology Collection," 2009. http://irl.cs.ucla.edu/topology/.
6. R. Oliveira, B. Zhang, and L. Zhang, "Observing the Evolution of Internet AS Topology," in Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, August 2007.
7. M. Roughan, S. Tuke, and O. Maennel, "Bigfoot, sasquatch, the yeti and other missing links: what we don't know about the AS graph," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM IMC, 2008.
8. N. Feamster, J. Jung, and H. Balakrishnan, "An empirical study of bogon route advertisements," ACM Computer Communication Review, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 63--70, 2005.
9. N. Spring, R. Mahajan, and D. Wetherall, "Measuring ISP Topologies with Rocketfuel," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM. 2002.
10. M. Caesar and J. Rexford, "BGP routing policies in ISP networks," IEEE Network, vol. 19, no. 6, 2005.
11. K. Claffy, Y. Hyun, K. Keys, M. Fomenkov, and D. Krioukov, "Internet mapping: From art to science," in Proc. of IEEE Conference For Homeland Security, Cybersecurity Applications&Technology, 2009.
12. R. Govindan and H. Tangmunarunkit, "Heuristics for Internet map discovery," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2000.
13. Y. Shavitt and E. Shir, "DIMES: let the Internet measure itself," ACM CCR, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 71--74, 2005.
14. R. Sherwood, A. Bender, and N. Spring, "Discarte: a disjunctive Internet cartographer," in Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, 2008.
15. J. Heidemann, Y. Pradkin, R. Govindan, C. Papadopoulos, G. Bartlett, and J. Bannister, "Census and survey of the visible Internet," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM IMC, pp. 169--182, 2008.
16. B. Donnet, P. Raoult, T. Friedman, and M. Crovella, Efficient algorithms for large-scale topology discovery," in Proc. of ACM SIGMETRICS, pp. 327--338, 2005.
17. B. Donnet and T. Friedman, "Internet topology discovery: a survey," IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, vol. 9, pp. 2--15, December 2007.
18. A. Zeitoun and S. Jamin, "Rapid exploration of Internet live address space using optimal discovery path," in Proc. Global Communications Conference, 2003.
19. B. Augustin, X. Cuvellier, B. Orgogozo, F. Viger, T. Friedman, M. Latapy, C. Magnien, and R. Teixeira, Avoiding traceroute anomalies with Paris traceroute," in Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCOMM on Internet measurement, 2006.
20. M. H. Gunes and K. Saraç, "Analyzing router responsiveness to active measurement probes," in Proc. of Passive and Active Measurement conference (PAM), 2009.
21. R. Mahajan, D. Wetherall, and T. Anderson, "Understanding BGP Misconfigurations," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM September 2002.
22. A. Feldmann, O. Maennel, Z. Mao, A. Berger, and B. Maggs, "Locating Internet routing instabilities," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, (Portland, OR), 2004.
23. Z. M. Mao, J. Rexford, J. Wang, and R. H. Katz, "Towards an accurate AS-level traceroute tool," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, 2003.
24. H. Chang, S. Jamin, and W. Willinger, "Inferring AS-level Internet topology from router-level path traces," in Proceedings of SPIE ITCom, 2001.
25. Y. H. Andre, Y. Hyun, A. Broido, and K. Claffy, "On third-party addresses in traceroute paths," 2003.
26. Team Cymru. http://www.team-cymru.org/.
27. V. Paxson, "End-to-end routing behavior in the Internet," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, 1997.
28. C. Labovitz and A. Ahuja, "Shining Light on Dark Internet Address Space," NANOG 23, 2001.
29. M. Lad, D. Massey, D. Pei, Y. Wu, B. Zhang, and L. Zhang, "PHAS: A prefix hijack alert system," in Proc. of the 15th USENIX Security Symposium, 2006.
30. P. Boothe, J. Hiebert, and R. Bush, "How Prevalent is Prefix Hijacking on the Internet?," NANOG 36, February 2006.
31. D. Wetherall, R. Mahajan, and T. Anderson, "Understanding BGP misconfigurations," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, 2002.
32. Y. Chen, A. Bargteil, D. Bindel, R. Katz, and J. Kubiatowicz, "Quantifying network denial of service: A location service case study," in Proc. of ICICS, 2001.
33. T. G. Griffin Interdomain routing links. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/tgg22/interdomain/.
34. C. Labovitz, R. Malan, and F. Jahanian, "Internet routing instability," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, 1998.
35. Z. M. Mao, R. Govindan, G. Varghese, and R. Katz, "Route flap damping exacerbates Internet routing convergence," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, 2002.
36. T. G. Griffin and G. Huston, "BGP Wedgies." RFC 4264, 2005.
37. D. McPerson, V. Gill, D. Walton, and A. Retana, "Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) Persistent Route Oscillation Condition." Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC 3345, August 2002.
38. R. Beverly and S. Bauer, "The spoofer project: Inferring the extent of source address filtering on the internet," in Proceedings of USENIX SRUTI workshop, July 2005.
39. RIPE's Routing Information Service. http://www.ripe.net/ris/.
40. University of Oregon RouteViews project. http://www.routeviews.org/.
41. A. Lakhina, J. Byers, M. Crovella, and P. Xie, "Sampling biases in IP topology measurements," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, (San Francisco, CA), April 2003.
42. H. Chang, R. Govindan, S. Jamin, S. Shenker, and W. Willinger, "Towards capturing representative AS-level Internet topologies," Computer Networks, Elsevier, vol. 44, April 2004.
43. J. Postel, "Internet protocol specification." Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC791, September 1981.
44. F. Baker, "Requirements for IP version 4 routers." Internet Engineering Task Force, RFC1812, June 1995.

Index Terms

• Networks

  • Network architectures