North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Further Internet Metrics

  • From: dave o'leary
  • Date: Wed Jan 03 12:15:26 2001 
At 11:07 AM 1/2/01 -0700, Rodney Joffe wrote:
Randy Bush wrote:
>
> i submit that your metrics are subject to serious question. while we expect
> little of boarwatch, i would hope academics would be a bit more responsible.
>
> e.g. how do you assign the traffic share of the traffic going to a smallish
> network which is multi-homed behind sprint, uunet, and which is also appears
> at mae-west? hint: if you look from a uunet or sprint perspective, then you
> assign it to uunet or sprint depending on perspective. but if you also peer
> openly at mae-west, then you don't assign it to either.
>
> so how about some prudent or accurate, as opposed to merely fast, ideas?

If someone(s) were to outline and define a study/project, and the
project passed both the technical and political scrutiny of the NANO in
general, CenterGate might be willing to provide some funding for same.
We might be even more willing if the project was overseen or assisted by
one of the University groups involved in NANOG (Merit, ISI, UofO, CAIDA,
etc).
If nothing else, a couple of well defined measures of market share would
be quite useful, particularly if they were specified in such a way that
they could be measured in a deterministic manner.  However, as you
point out this is essentially impossible, but I wouldn't characterize these
as political, but rather as market issues.

                                                        dave


It seems to me, however, that the political issues will make this
impossible. But if someone can convince "those who must be obeyed" that
this would be of general value, I'm open.
--
Rodney Joffe
CenterGate Research Group, LLC.
http://www.centergate.com
"Technology so advanced, even we don't understand it!"(SM)