skip to main content
10.1145/948205.948219acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesimcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

An empirical evaluation of wide-area internet bottlenecks

Published:27 October 2003Publication History

ABSTRACT

Conventional wisdom has been that the performance limitations in the current Internet lie at the edges of the network -- i.e last mile connectivity to users, or access links of stub ASes. As these links are upgraded, however, it is important to consider where new bottlenecks and hot-spots are likely to arise. In this paper, we address this question through an investigation of non-access bottlenecks. These are links within carrier ISPs or between neighboring carriers that could potentially constrain the bandwidth available to long-lived TCP flows. Through an extensive measurement study, we discover, classify, and characterize bottleneck links (primarily in the U.S.) in terms of their location, latency, and available capacity.We find that about 50% of the Internet paths explored have a non-access bottleneck with available capacity less than 50 Mbps, many of which limit the performance of well-connected nodes on the Internet today. Surprisingly, the bottlenecks identified are roughly equally split between intra-ISP links and peering links between ISPs. Also, we find that low-latency links, both intra-ISP and peering, have a significant likelihood of constraining available bandwidth. Finally, we discuss the implications of our findings on related issues such as choosing an access provider and optimizing routes through the network. We believe that these results could be valuable in guiding the design of future network services, such as overlay routing, in terms of which links or paths to avoid (and how to avoid them) in order to improve performance.

References

  1. D. Andersen, H. Balakrishnan, M. Kaashoek, and R. Morris. Resilient Overlay Networks. In Proceedings of the 18th Symposium on Operating System Principles, Banff, Canada, October 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. H. Balakrishnan, S. Seshan, M. Stemm, and R. H. Katz. Analyzing stability in wide-area network performance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS, Seattle, WA, June 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. L.S.Brakmo,S.W.O'Malley,andL.L.Peterson. TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Avoidance. In Proceedings of the SIGCOMM '94 Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols, August 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. T. Bu, N. Duffield, F. L. Presti, and D. Towsley. Network tomography on general topologies. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS, Marina Del Ray, CA, June 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. R. L. Carter and M. E. Crovella. Measuring bottleneck link speed in packet-switched networks. Performance Evaluation, 27-28:297--318, October 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis (CAIDA). Internet tools taxonomy. http://www.caida.org/tools/taxonomy/, October 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. A. Downey. Using pathchar to estimate internet link characteristics. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Cambridge, MA, August 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. L. Gao. On inferring autonomous system relationships in the Internet. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 9(6), December 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. R. Govindan and V. Paxson. Estimating router ICMP generation delays. In Proceedings of Passive and Active Measurement Workshop (PAM), Fort Collins, CO, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. J. Guojun, G. Yang, B. R. Crowley, and D. A. Agarwal. Network characterization service (NCS). In Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing (HPDC), San Francisco, CA, August 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. U. Hengartner, S. Moon, R. Mortier, and C. Diot. Detection and analysis of routing loops in packet traces. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Workshop (IMW), November 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. V. Jacobson. pathchar - A Tool to Infer Characteristics of Internet Paths. ftp://ee.lbl.gov/pathchar/, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. M. Jain and C. Dovrolis. End-to-end available bandwidth: Measurement methodology, dynamics, and relation with TCP throughput. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Pittsburgh, PA, August 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. M. Jain and C. Dovrolis. Pathload: A measurement tool for end-to-end available bandwidth. In Proceedings of Passive and Active Measurement Workshop (PAM), Fort Collins, CO, March 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. S. Jaiswal, G. Iannaccone, C. Diot, J. Kurose, and D. Towsley. Measurement and classification of out-of-sequence packets in a tier-1 IP backbone. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Workshop (IMW), November 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. C. Labovitz, A. Ahuja, and F. Jahanian. Experimental study of Internet stability and backbone failures. In Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing (FTCS), Madison, WI, June 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. K. Lai and M. Baker. Nettimer: A tool for measuring bottleneck link bandwidth. In Proceedings of USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems, March 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. B. A. Mah. pchar: A tool for measuring internet path characteristics. http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Software/pchar/, June 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. A. P. Markopoulou, F. A. Tobagi, and M. J. Karam. Assessment of VoIP quality over Internet backbones. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM'02, New York, NY, June 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. M. Mathis and J. Mahdavi. Diagnosing Internet Congestion with a Transport Layer Performance Tool . In Proc. INET '96, Montreal, Canada, June 1996. http://www.isoc.org/inet96/proceedings/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Network Characterization Service: Netest and Pipechar. http://www-didc.lbl.gov/pipechar, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. ns-2 Network Simulator. http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/, 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. V. Paxson. End-to-end internet packet dynamics. Proceedings of the SIGCOMM '97 Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols, pages 139--152, September 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. V. Paxson. End-to-end routing behavior in the internet. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 5(5):601--615, October 1997. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. V. Paxson, A. Adams, and M. Mathis. Experiences with NIMI. In Proceedings of Passive and Active Measurement Workshop (PAM), Hamilton, New Zealand, April 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. PlanetLab. http://www.planet-lab.org, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. RADB whois Server. whois.radb.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. RIPE whois Service. whois.ripe.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. BGP Tables from the University of Oregon RouteViews Project. http://moat.nlanr.net/AS/data.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. University of Oregon, RouteViews Project. http://www.routeviews.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. S. Savage, T. Anderson, A. Aggarwal, D. Becker, N. Cardwell, A. Collins, E. Hoffman, J. Snell, A. Vahdat, J. Voelker, and J. Zahorjan. Detour: a case for informed internet routing and transport. IEEE Micro, volume 19 no. 1:50--59, January 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. S. Savage, A. Collins, E. Hoffman, J. Snell, and T. Anderson. The end-to-end effects of internet path selection. In Proceedings of the SIGCOMM '99 Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols, pages 289--299, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. L. Subramanian, S. Agarwal, J. Rexford, and R. H. Katz. Characterizing the Internet hierarchy from multiple vantage points. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, June 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Traceroute.org. http://www.traceroute.org.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Y. Zhang, L. Breslau, V. Paxson, and S. Shenker. On the characteristics and origins of Internet flow rates. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Pittsburgh, PA, August 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Y. Zhang, N. Duffield, V. Paxson, and S. Shenker. On the constancy of Internet path properties. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Workshop (IMW), November 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Y. Zhang, V. Paxson, and S. Shenker. The stationarity of internet path properties: Routing, loss, and throughput. Technical report, ICSI Center for Internet Research, May 2000.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. An empirical evaluation of wide-area internet bottlenecks

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          IMC '03: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
          October 2003
          328 pages
          ISBN:1581137737
          DOI:10.1145/948205

          Copyright © 2003 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 27 October 2003

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          IMC '03 Paper Acceptance Rate32of109submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate277of1,083submissions,26%

          Upcoming Conference

          IMC '24
          ACM Internet Measurement Conference
          November 4 - 6, 2024
          Madrid , AA , Spain

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader