Towards improving packet probing techniques

Subscribe (Full Service)


	Search: The ACM Digital Library The Guide

	Feedback

Towards improving packet probing techniques

Full text

Pdf (1.04 MB)

Source

Internet Measurement Conference archive
Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Internet Measurement table of contents

San Francisco, California, USA

Session: Active measurements table of contents

Pages: 145 - 150

Year of Publication: 2001

ISBN:1-58113-435-5

Authors

Matthew J. Luckie	University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA and University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
Anthony J. McGregor	University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA and University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
Hans-Werner Braun	University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA and University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

Sponsor

SIGCOMM: ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication

Publisher

ACM New York, NY, USA

Bibliometrics

Downloads (6 Weeks): 7, Downloads (12 Months): 37, Citation Count: 5

Additional Information:

abstract references cited by index terms collaborative colleagues

Tools and Actions:	Request Permissions Review this Article Save this Article to a Binder Display Formats: BibTeX EndNote ACM Ref

DOI Bookmark:	Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/505202.505221 What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Packet probing is an important Internet measurement technique, supporting the investigation of packet delay, path, and loss. Current packet probing techniques use Internet Protocols such as the Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP), the User Datagram Protocol (UDP), and the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). These protocols were not originally designed for measurement purposes. Current packet probing techniques have several limitations that can be avoided. The IP Measurement Protocol (IPMP) is presented as a protocol that addresses several of the limitations discussed.

REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

	1	Postel, "Internet control message protocol," RFC 792, IETF, 1981.
	2	Postel, "User datagram protocol," RFC 768, IETF, 1980.
	3	J. Postel, "Transmission control protocol," RFC 793, IETF, 1981.
	4	S. Shalunov, B. Teitelbaum, and M. Zekauskas, 'A one-way delay measurement protocol," IPPM work in progress, IETF, 2001.
	5	A. J. McGregor, "The IP measurement protocol," http://moat. nlanr.net/AMP/AMP/IPMP/.
	6	J. Postel, "Internet protocol," RFC 791, IETF, 1981.
	7	S. Casner, "The mtrace (8) manual page," http://ftp.parc.xerox. com/pub/net-research/ipmulti/.
	8	V. Paxson, G. Almes, J. Mahdavi, and M. Mathis, "Framework for IP performance metrics," RFC 2330, IETF, 1998.
	9	G. Almes, S. Kalidindi, and M. Zekauskas, "A one-way delay metric for IPPM," RFC 2679, IETF, 1999.
	10	F. Baker, "Requirements for IP version 4 routers," RFC 1812, IETF, 1995.
	11	Vern Paxson, On calibrating measurements of packet transit times, Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGMETRICS joint international conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems, p.11-21, June 22-26, 1998, Madison, Wisconsin, United States
	12	A. Pasztor and D. Veitch, "A precision infrastructure for active probing," in Proceedings of the PAM2001 workshop on Passive and Active Measurements, Amsterdam, Apr. 2001.
	13	D.L. Mills, "Network time protocol (version 3): Specification, implementation and analysis," RFC 1305, IETF, 1992.
	14	S. Deering and R. Hinden, "Internet protocol, version 6 (IPv6) specification," RFC 2460, IETF, 1998.
	15	Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analyis (CAIDA), "Hop count distribution," http:l/www.caida.org/tools/ measurementlskitter/RSSAC/.
	16	Vern Paxson, End-to-end routing behavior in the Internet, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), v.5 n.5, p.601-615, Oct. 1997 [doi>10.1109/90.649563]
	17	S. Kent and R. Atkinson, "Security architecture for the Internet protocol," RFC 2401, IETF, 1998.
	18	S. Kent and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)," RFC 2406, IETF, 1998.
	19	K. Nichols, S. Blake, F. Baker, and D. Black, "Definition of the Differentiated Services field (DS field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 headers," FC 2474, IETF, 1998.
	20	K.C. Claffy, G.C. Polyzos, and H-W. Braun, "Measurement considerations for assessing unidirectional latencies," Internetworking: Research andExperience, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 121-132, 1993.
	21	S.B. Moon, P. Skelly, and D. Towsley, "Estimation and removal of clock skew from network delay measurements," in Proceedings of 1999 IEEE INFOCOM, New York, NY, Mar. 1999.
	22	A.J. McGregor and H-W. Braun, "Balancing cost and utility in active monitoring: The AMP example," in Proceedings of INET 2000, Tokyo, Japan, July 2000.

CITED BY 5

	Matthew Luckie , Tony McGregor, Path diagnosis with IPMP, Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Network troubleshooting: research, theory and operations practice meet malfunctioning reality, September 03-03, 2004, Portland, Oregon, USA
	Ratul Mahajan , Neil Spring , David Wetherall , Thomas Anderson, User-level internet path diagnosis, Proceedings of the nineteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles, October 19-22, 2003, Bolton Landing, NY, USA
	Sridhar Machiraju , Darryl Veitch, A measurement-friendly network (MFN) architecture, Proceedings of the 2006 SIGCOMM workshop on Internet network management, p.53-58, September 11-15, 2006, Pisa, Italy
	Christian Henke , Carsten Schmoll , Tanja Zseby, Empirical evaluation of hash functions for multipoint measurements, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, v.38 n.3, July 2008
	Ling-Jyh Chen , Tony Sun , Bo-Chun Wang , M. Y. Sanadidi , Mario Gerla, PBProbe: A capacity estimation tool for high speed networks, Computer Communications, v.31 n.17, p.3883-3893, November, 2008