|
@@ -1,18 +1,168 @@
|
|
|
-<h2>dn42 peer finder</h2>
|
|
|
+<h1>dn42 peer finder</h1>
|
|
|
|
|
|
+<h2>What is this?</h2>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>This tool allows you to find "good" peerings for dn42, by measuring the
|
|
|
+latency from various points in the network towards you.</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h2>How does it work?</h2>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>
|
|
|
+ <ol>
|
|
|
+ <li>you enter your (Internet) IP address or hostname</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>various routers participating in dn42 will ping you over the Internet</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>after a short while, you get back all the latency results</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>you can then peer with people close to you (low latency)</li>
|
|
|
+ </ol>
|
|
|
+</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>
|
|
|
<form action="/submit" method="POST">
|
|
|
Target:
|
|
|
<input type="text" name="target" />
|
|
|
<input type="submit" name="Launch" />
|
|
|
</form>
|
|
|
+</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h2>Why look at latency?</h2>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h3>The problem of peering quality</h3>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>Determining what is a "good" peering in dn42 is quite difficult: many
|
|
|
+criteria come into play, such as latency, jitter, capacity, packet loss,
|
|
|
+stability, or even the price your ISP will pay (peering vs. transit).</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>On the other hand, a "bad" peering is easy to picture: if you are in
|
|
|
+Paris and peer with somebody in Australia, then you might end up doing
|
|
|
+Paris → Australia → Hamburg if you want to send packets to Germany. This
|
|
|
+does not feel very efficient. People usually solve this problem with
|
|
|
+policy routing (local preference and path-prepending). But it's still a
|
|
|
+good idea to build good links and avoid terrible links.</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>Of course, you need to build long-distance links sometimes. Otherwise,
|
|
|
+dn42 would be made of small, independent islands. This tool can also help
|
|
|
+you to choose the best long-distance links.</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h3>Looking at latency</h3>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>Latency is actually a good enough indicator of "distance". For
|
|
|
+instance, two machines located at the same ISP are expected to have low
|
|
|
+latency towards each other. On the other hand, a latency above 200 ms
|
|
|
+usually indicates that the two machines are quite far away geographically
|
|
|
+(but not always).</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>Additionally, latency can vary widely for long-distance links,
|
|
|
+depending on the quality of transit and peering agreements between ISPs.
|
|
|
+For instance, to reach a specific destination in Singapore from France, we
|
|
|
+have the following latency as of September 2014:</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<table>
|
|
|
+ <tr>
|
|
|
+ <th>ISP</th>
|
|
|
+ <th>Latency</th>
|
|
|
+ </tr>
|
|
|
+ <tr>
|
|
|
+ <td>Online</td>
|
|
|
+ <td>177 ms</td>
|
|
|
+ </tr>
|
|
|
+ <tr>
|
|
|
+ <td>tetaneutral.net</td>
|
|
|
+ <td>264 ms</td>
|
|
|
+ </tr>
|
|
|
+ <tr>
|
|
|
+ <td>SFR</td>
|
|
|
+ <td>267 ms</td>
|
|
|
+ </tr>
|
|
|
+ <tr>
|
|
|
+ <td>Free</td>
|
|
|
+ <td>365 ms</td>
|
|
|
+ </tr>
|
|
|
+ <tr>
|
|
|
+ <td>OVH</td>
|
|
|
+ <td>402 ms</td>
|
|
|
+ </tr>
|
|
|
+</table>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>Of course, this is only a snapshot, and reflects the situation for a
|
|
|
+specific source and destination. Still, the latency more than doubles
|
|
|
+depending on the ISP, which in this case strongly favours a peering with
|
|
|
+somebody hosted by Online instead of OVH.</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h3>Situations this tool aims to solve</h3>
|
|
|
|
|
|
-<h3>Participate in the measurement network</h3>
|
|
|
+<p>To sum up, this tool can help in several situations:
|
|
|
+ <ol>
|
|
|
+ <li>Detecting when somebody is in the same datacenter as you, so that
|
|
|
+ it's mostly free to peer</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>When you are far from everybody, find the peering with the lowest
|
|
|
+ latency</li>
|
|
|
+ </ol>
|
|
|
+</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>By building low-latency links in dn42, it's actually possible to have
|
|
|
+lower latency in dn42 than over the Internet, for the same destination
|
|
|
+(it's called <em>detour routing</em>).</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h2>I want to participate!</h2>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>This tool relies on a pool of workers, all over dn42, that process
|
|
|
+requests, perform ping measurements, and report back the results. You're
|
|
|
+welcome to add your own machines to the pool!</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
<p>You need to separately register each computer that will provide
|
|
|
measurements. Manual validation is performed for each registration.</p>
|
|
|
|
|
|
+<p>The contact information is free-form, and will be shown to users when
|
|
|
+they launch measurements. This allows users to contact you if they want
|
|
|
+to peer.</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
<form action="/create/participant" method="POST">
|
|
|
Machine name (required): <input type="text" name="name" /><br />
|
|
|
Mean of contacting you, like IRC nick, mail address, ... (optional): <input type="text" name="contact" /><br />
|
|
|
<input type="submit" name="Register" />
|
|
|
</form>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h2>Known issues</h2>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>
|
|
|
+Current limitations:
|
|
|
+ <ol>
|
|
|
+ <li>Only the average RTT is measured, we should include other simple
|
|
|
+ statistics (jitter, min/max RTT, packet loss)</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>The API is not documented (just look at the code)</li>
|
|
|
+ </ol>
|
|
|
+Unavoidable facts that cannot be fixed:
|
|
|
+ <ol>
|
|
|
+ <li>Latency measured today might be meaningless tomorrow, as routing
|
|
|
+ on the Internet is always changing</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>Low latency does not guarantee high throughput</li>
|
|
|
+ </ol>
|
|
|
+</p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h2>Source code</h2>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>The source code is available <a href="https://code.ffdn.org/zorun/peerfinder">here</a></p>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<h2>Privacy</h2>
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
+<p>Privacy for users of this service:
|
|
|
+ <ol>
|
|
|
+ <li>Only participants in the measurement pool have access to your IP
|
|
|
+ address (so that they can ping you, obviously)</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>New participants (see below) are moderated manually</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>Results have an unpredicatble URL. Of course, if you share the
|
|
|
+ link to the results, anybody can see them.</li>
|
|
|
+ </ol>
|
|
|
+ Privacy for participants in the measurement pool:
|
|
|
+ <ol>
|
|
|
+ <li>Users only get access to the machine name and contact information
|
|
|
+ you provided</li>
|
|
|
+ <li>In particular, users don't get access to your IP address (of
|
|
|
+ course, users can always use tcpdump to see where do the ping requests
|
|
|
+ come from)</lI>
|
|
|
+ </ol>
|
|
|
+</p>
|