[146211] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Router and interface naming convention survey
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Jennifer Rexford)
Mon Nov 7 11:18:05 2011
From: Jennifer Rexford <jrex@CS.Princeton.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <4EB80258.6080501@cs.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:16:52 -0500
To: Joseph Chabarek <jpchaba@cs.wisc.edu>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Joe,
> I am doing a survey to see what naming conventions are used for =
routers and router interfaces as part of a measurement study
On a related note, you might be interested in a study we did a few years =
ago about errors in naming router interfaces, where a router in one =
location has a name suggestive of a different location (e.g., because a =
network administrator did not update the DNS entries for the interface =
names). See
Ming Zhang, Yaoping Ruan, Vivek Pai, and Jennifer Rexford, "How DNS =
misnaming distorts Internet topology mapping," Proc. USENIX Annual =
Technical Conference, May/June 2006.
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~jrex/papers/dns06.pdf
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~jrex/talks/dns06.ppt
In particular, we found that a few "errors" in the DNS names for router =
interfaces could lead to significant distortions in measurement studies =
-- e.g., a study might wrongly conclude that path inflation is very high =
because traceroute measurements wrongly suggested that the traffic =
traverses a particular sequence of cities...
Best wishes...
-- Jen=
