ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
User-level internet path diagnosis
Full text PdfPdf (404 KB)
Source ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles archive
Proceedings of the nineteenth ACM symposium on Operating systems principles table of contents
Bolton Landing, NY, USA
SESSION: Probing the black box table of contents
Pages: 106 - 119  
Year of Publication: 2003
ISBN:1-58113-757-5
Also published in ...
Authors
Ratul Mahajan  University of Washington
Neil Spring  University of Washington
David Wetherall  University of Washington
Thomas Anderson  University of Washington
Sponsors
SIGOPS: ACM Special Interest Group on Operating Systems
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 10,   Downloads (12 Months): 68,   Citation Count: 32
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/945445.945456
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Diagnosing faults in the Internet is arduous and time-consuming, in part because the network is composed of diverse components spread across many administrative domains. We consider an extreme form of this problem: can end users, with no special privileges, identify and pinpoint faults inside the network that degrade the performance of their applications? To answer this question, we present both an architecture for user-level Internet path diagnosis and a practical tool to diagnose paths in the current Internet. Our architecture requires only a small amount of network support, yet it is nearly as complete as analyzing a packet trace collected at all routers along the path. Our tool, tulip, diagnoses reordering, loss and significant queuing events by leveraging well deployed but little exploited router features that approximate our architecture. Tulip can locate points of reordering and loss to within three hops and queuing to within four hops on most paths that we measured. This granularity is comparable to that of a hypothetical network tomography tool that uses 65 diverse hosts to localize faults on a given path. We conclude by proposing several simple changes to the Internet to further improve its diagnostic capabilities.


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
 
2
K. Anagnostakis, M. Greenwald, and R. Ryger. cing: Measuring network-internal delays using only existing infrastructure. In IEEE INFOCOM, Apr. 2003.
3
 
4
 
5
P. Barham, R. Isaacs, R. Mortier, and D. Narayanan. Magpie: Online modelling and performance-aware systems. In HotOS-IX, May 2003.
6
 
7
A. Broido. Ping Record Route stats. http://www.caida.org/~broido/png/pingR.html.
 
8
 
9
Cisco IOS NetFlow. http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/732/Tech/nmp/netflow/index.shtml.
 
10
11
 
12
 
13
N. Duffield, F. Presti, V. Paxson, and D. Towsley. Inferring link loss using striped unicast probes. In IEEE INFOCOM, Apr. 2001.
14
 
15
S. Floyd. Questions about the Internet. http://www.icir.org/floyd/questions.html, May 2002.
 
16
R. Govindan and V. Paxson. Estimating router ICMP generation delays. In Passive & Active Measurement (PAM), Mar. 2002.
 
17
 
18
V. Jacobson. Pathchar. ftp://ftp.ee.lbl.gov/pathchar.
19
20
 
21
K. Lai and M. Baker. Nettimer: A tool for measuring bottleneck link bandwidth. In USITS, Mar. 2001.
 
22
K. Lakshminarayanan, I. Stoica, and S. Shenker. Building a flexible and efficient routing infrastructure: Need and challenges. Technical Report CSD-03-1254, University of California, Berkeley, 2003.
23
24
 
25
G. Martinez. Problems with AT&T. NANOG archives: http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/msg08420.html, Mar. 2003.
 
26
J. McClave and F. Dietrich. Statistics. Macmillan Publishing Company, 6th edition, 1994.
 
27
P. McKenney. Stochastic fairness queuing. In IEEE INFOCOM, June 1990.
 
28
S. Moon, P. Skelly, and D. Towsley. Estimation and removal of clock skew from network delay measurements. In IEEE INFOCOM, Mar. 1999.
 
29
S. Ostermann. tcptrace. http://jarok.cs.ohiou.edu/software/tcptrace/index.html.
30
 
31
J. Padhye and S. Floyd. Identifying the TCP behavior of Web servers. In ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2001.
 
32
V. Padmanabhan, L. Qiu, and H. Wang. Server-based inference of Internet performance. In IEEE INFOCOM, Apr. 2003.
 
33
K. Papagiannaki, S. Moon, C. Fraleigh, P. Thiran, F. Tobagi, and C. Diot. Analysis of measured single-hop delay from an operational backbone network. In IEEE INFOCOM, June 2002.
34
35
36
37
 
38
R. Perlman. Network Layer Protocols with Byzantine Robustness. PhD thesis, MIT, 1988.
 
39
L. Peterson, T. Anderson, D. Culler, and T. Roscoe. A blueprint for introducing disruptive technology into the Internet. In HotNets-I, Oct. 2002.
 
40
J. Postel. Internet control message protocol. IETF RFC 792, Sept. 1981.
 
41
J. Postel. Internet protocol specification. IETF RFC 791, Sept. 1981.
 
42
RouteScience. http://www.routescience.com/.
 
43
R. Ryger. fixclock: removing clock artifacts from communication timestamps. Technical Report DCS/TR-1243, Yale University, March 2003.
 
44
S. Savage. Sting: A TCP-based network measurement tool. In USITS, Oct. 1999.
45
46
47
48
 
49
N. Spring, D. Wetherall, and T. Anderson. Scriptroute: A public Internet measurement facility. In USITS, Mar. 2003.
 
50
W. Stevens. TCP slow start, congestion avoidance, fast retransmit, and fast recovery algorithms. IETF RFC 2001, Jan. 1997.
 
51
Y. Tsang, M. Coates, and R. Nowak. Passive network tomography using EM algorithms. In IEEE Int'l Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, May 2001.
 
52
Tulip. http://www.cs.washington.edu/research/networking/tulip/.
 
53
A. Whitaker and D. Wetherall. Forwarding without loops in Icarus. In IEEE OPENARCH, June 2002.
 
54
L. Zhang, Z. Liu, and C. Xia. Clock synchronization algorithms for network measurements. In IEEE INFOCOM, June 2002.
55
56

CITED BY  32

Collaborative Colleagues:
Ratul Mahajan: colleagues
Neil Spring: colleagues
David Wetherall: colleagues
Thomas Anderson: colleagues