[RSSAC Caucus] Metrics vantage point connectivity

[Daniel Migault]

Hi Paul,

I do not remember why the following requirements have been added. Though, I
am reading "should" as non mandatory, so I am find with the text as it is,
but I would not object this sentence to be removed either.

"""
When VMs are utilized, they should provide dedicated IP addresses and a
dedicated operating system environment.
"""

Yours,
Daniel


On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 4:04 PM Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman at icann.org> wrote:

> Greetings again. The current text on vantage point connectivity says:
>
> > 3.3    Connectivity and Other Requirements
> >
> > Vantage points shall be hosted inside data centers with reliable power
> and diverse connectivity providers.
> >
> > Vantage points within the same geographic region should use different
> connectivity providers if at all possible. E.g., VP#1 uses ISP#1, VP#2 uses
> ISP#2, etc. Diversity of connectivity providers helps to increase RSS
> coverage and avoid situations where multiple vantage points all reach the
> same root server instance.
> >
> > Vantage points may be deployed on “bare metal” or virtual machines
> (VMs). When VMs are utilized, they should provide dedicated IP addresses
> and a dedicated operating system environment.
>
> In essence, the text in the second paragraph requires that every vantage
> point allow provisioning of the connectivity provider. It basically
> restricts the kind of VMs that could be used, since none of the widely-used
> VM providers I have found allow for such provisioning. In fact, it kinda
> pushes the vantage points to be on bare metal, since those rentals are more
> likely to allow such provisioning. Given that the regions are quite large
> and so the cities could be quite far from each other, it is not clear how
> much advantage (if any) this restriction would have. It is also not clear
> why the diversity is given just for within a region.
>
> Separately, the text "E.g., VP#1 uses ISP#1, VP#2 uses ISP#2, etc." is not
> terribly grammatical. It also uses "ISP" instead of "connectivity
> provider". It doesn't add anything to the paragraph, and can safely be
> removed.
>
> If this is really what RSSAC wants, that's fine, but it will place limits
> on which cities can have vantage points because not all cities have data
> centers that allow this kind of provisioning. If RSSAC instead wants to
> give itself more freedom for vantage point placement, maybe just change the
> second paragraph to:
>
> Having diverse connectivity providers for the vantage points helps to
> increase RSS coverage and avoid situations where multiple vantage points
> all reach the same root server instance. The network routing used by
> vantage points is detectable using the measurements described in Section
> 4.8. If configuring particular vantage points allows selecting a
> connectivity provider, this can be used to increase the diversity of the
> measurement system.
>
> --Paul Hoffman_______________________________________________
> rssac-caucus mailing list
> rssac-caucus at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/rssac-caucus
>
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.



-- 
Daniel Migault
Ericsson
8400 boulevard Decarie
Montreal, QC   H4P 2N2
Canada

Phone: +1 514-452-2160
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-caucus/attachments/20191219/87747715/attachment.html>