probe selection criteria on "WW" measurements
Hi, I have two questions regarding probe selection for UDMs. When I specify for example that I want to run an ongoing measurement on 250 probes in the "WW" region, will these probes remain the same throughout the lifecycle of the measurement (unlimited) or will these be somehow randomized every time the measurement is run? Secondly, I am wondering about even spread of probe location in doing such a measurement. For instance I am as much interested in results from regions that have only a few probes, as I am interested in results from those regions that are better served. When I look at the results so far of a test measurement, it appears that I'm receiving results from 35 probes in US, but only 3 from FI and none from NO. The latter surprises me a bit since there are 100 probes reported in NO, so why aren't there any results from those coming back? While I understand that countries with more probes will likely yield more results, I am wondering if there is any method to get a better "country-balanced" result for measurements ran in "WW". Thanks, ~paul -- Paul Vlaar DNS Infrastructure Group Afilias e-mail: pvlaar@afilias.info phone: +1-416-673-4078 mobile: +31-6-506-306-35 mobile USA: +1-602-410-4148
On Jul 24, 2014, at 9:26 AM, Paul Vlaar <pvlaar@afilias.info> wrote:
When I specify for example that I want to run an ongoing measurement on 250 probes in the "WW" region, will these probes remain the same throughout the lifecycle of the measurement (unlimited) or will these be somehow randomized every time the measurement is run?
Probe selection will remain static for the duration of the UDM (unless you add/remove probes). - Jared
On 24/7/14, 4:09 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
Probe selection will remain static for the duration of the UDM (unless you add/remove probes).
I don't see a way to add/remove probes to an existing UDM, or to make any significant changes other than the description field. So I suppose one way around this is to create a new UDM for every iteration of my measurement, in order to randomize probe selection. Doesn't sound very appealing to me. ~paul -- Paul Vlaar DNS Infrastructure Group Afilias e-mail: pvlaar@afilias.info phone: +1-416-673-4078 mobile: +31-6-506-306-35 mobile USA: +1-602-410-4148
On 2014.07.24. 11:17, Paul Vlaar wrote:
On 24/7/14, 4:09 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
Probe selection will remain static for the duration of the UDM (unless you add/remove probes).
I don't see a way to add/remove probes to an existing UDM, or to make any significant changes other than the description field.
See https://atlas.ripe.net/docs/rest/#participation-request
So I suppose one way around this is to create a new UDM for every iteration of my measurement, in order to randomize probe selection. Doesn't sound very appealing to me.
Neither does it to us ;-) Cheers, Robert
~paul
On 24.07.14 17:17 , Paul Vlaar wrote:
On 24/7/14, 4:09 PM, Jared Mauch wrote:
Probe selection will remain static for the duration of the UDM (unless you add/remove probes).
I don't see a way to add/remove probes to an existing UDM, or to make any significant changes other than the description field.
This is possible using the API. This is not all that difficult as I could do it an my coding skills have eroded seriously. I would consider investing a little. It is easy to retrieve a list of all probes and make any selection one would like based on geographic location, AS, public address ..... https://atlas.ripe.net/docs/rest/#probe Then you can create a measurement requesting exactly those probes. https://atlas.ripe.net/docs/rest/#measurement
So I suppose one way around this is to create a new UDM for every iteration of my measurement, in order to randomize probe selection. Doesn't sound very appealing to me.
I recommend investing in using the API. Alternative is to wait for UI improvements. The only way to make sure these get done eventually is to get them onto the roadmap: http://roadmap.ripe.net/ripe-atlas/ Groetjes Daniel
Hi, I have two questions regarding probe selection for UDMs.
When I specify for example that I want to run an ongoing measurement on 250 probes in the "WW" region, will these probes remain the same throughout the lifecycle of the measurement (unlimited) or will these be somehow randomized every time the measurement is run?
Secondly, I am wondering about even spread of probe location in doing such a measurement. For instance I am as much interested in results from regions that have only a few probes, as I am interested in results from those regions that are better served. When I look at the results so far of a test measurement, it appears that I'm receiving results from 35 probes in US, but only 3 from FI and none from NO. The latter surprises me a bit since there are 100 probes reported in NO, so why aren't there any results from those coming back? The main reason for this is that when you specify only WW the only criterion to pick a probe is how busy it is in terms of how many measurements probes is assigned. We don't try to make any balance (country/region/ASN/prefix) except how busy is it and which controller
Hi Paul, On 7/24/14, 3:26 PM, Paul Vlaar wrote: they are connected.
While I understand that countries with more probes will likely yield more results, I am wondering if there is any method to get a better "country-balanced" result for measurements ran in "WW".
I am afraid not at the moment. But, maybe there is something to consider for the future since I think other people have request it and we have internally discuss about it.
Thanks,
~paul
Regards, Andreas
participants (5)
-
Andreas Strikos -
Daniel Karrenberg -
Jared Mauch -
Paul Vlaar -
Robert Kisteleki