[RSSAC Caucus] [Ext] Re: Metrics vantage point connectivity

[Paul Hoffman]

On Dec 20, 2019, at 10:22 AM, Wessels, Duane <dwessels at verisign.com> wrote:
>> In essence, the text in the second paragraph requires that every vantage point allow provisioning of the connectivity provider.
> 
> I don't see it as a strict requirement.  It says "should" and "if at all possible."  If the "if at all possible" part makes the statement too strong then its okay with me to remove it.

That would be good. The "should" seems sufficient: if there are multiple choices in a location, pick one that gives better diversity across the set of vantage points.

> IMO, at this point, RSSAC should say how it would like the system to work.  i.e., that connectivity diversity is a design goal.  I like the first part of your paragraph but I don't like that the latter part prioritizes VM selection over connectivity diversity.

Understood, and agree that RSSAC should give its priorities. I figured that the "data centers in different cities" was top priority and, once you had that, connectivity providers would not add much diversity. The couple of very low numbers we have seen so far are likely to be because the vantage point and the instance are in the same data center, so using different providers would only increase the latency by a few milliseconds if at all.

--Paul Hoffman
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3935 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/rssac-caucus/attachments/20191220/7f504ceb/smime.p7s>