anatomy of a large european ixp - tu berlin€¦ · tu berlin/telekom innovation laboratories to...
TRANSCRIPT
Anatomy of a Large European IXP
B. Ager, N. Chatzis, N. Sarrar TU Berlin/Telekom Innovation Laboratories
To appear at ACM SIGCOMM, Helsinki, Finland, August 2012
Anja Feldmann TU Berlin/Telekom Innovation Laboratories
W. Willinger AT&T Labs Research
S. Uhlig Queen Mary
University of London
The changing Internet
❒ What is your mental model of the Internet? ❍ What Internet does it capture? ❍ Today’s Internet?
❒ Some thoughts about local traffic and connectivity: ❍ IXPs can be as large as the top ISPs in the world ❍ Lots of data-centers/hosting locations around the
world
Internet: Accepted mental model
Internet – Network of networks
Accepted mental model of the Internet ❒ 35,000+ networks ❒ Hierarchical structure
❍ Tier-1 (10-20): ATT, L3, Sprint, DTAG, … ❍ Regional ISPs (15%): BT, Telefonica, … ❍ Stubs (85%): small ISPs, universities, enterprise
networks
❒ Known AS connectivity ❍ Customer-provider: 90,000+ ❍ Peer-peer: 35-40,000
Most recent mental model – a 2011
à Flattening of the AS topology
Google, Akamai,
RapidShare, …
Source: Arbor Networks 2009
Question – What about IXPs
à Flattening of the AS topology à What about IXPs impact
Google, Akamai,
RapidShare, … IXP
Source: Arbor Networks 2009
Outline
❒ Motivation ❒ IXP ecosystem ❒ Diversity ❒ Visibility ❒ Conclusion
IXP – architecture/business model
à Offers connectivity à Enables peering
Internet exchange point (IXP)
à Traffic Volume: Same as Tier-1 ISPs à Clear daily patterns
Traffic mix
IXP members
Outline
❒ Motivation ❒ IXP ecosystem ❒ Diversity ❒ Visibility ❒ Conclusion
Members business types
Ac.
net
.
Acc
ess
Con
nect
.
Con
tent
Hos
t
Ser
vice
Tra
nsit
CD
N
Ent
. net
.
Mon
itor
Perc
enta
ge o
f mem
bers
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Peers per member
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
050
150
250
350
Members
Num
ber o
f pee
rs ●
●
●
●
●●
●●
●
●
●●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●●●
●
●
●●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
T1 T2 Leaf●LISP SISP HCDN AEN
HTTP traffic
0 20 40 60 80 100
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
●
●
●
●
●
●
Percentage of HTTP/HTTPS traffic (bytes)
CD
F of
mem
bers
●
TotalLISPSISPHCDNAEN
Traffic asymmetry
Outgoing traffic per member (Mbit/s)
Inco
min
g tra
ffic
per m
embe
r (M
bit/s
)
100 101 102 103 104
100
101
102
103
104
●
●
●
●
●
●
● ●
●
● ●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●
●
●●
Lines at ratios20:1, 3:1, 1:1, 1:3, and 1:20
●
LISPSISPHCDNAEN
Geographic e2e distance
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000Distance (km)
Den
sity×
1000
00.
20.
40.
60.
8LISPSISPHCDN
Outline
❒ Motivation ❒ IXP ecosystem ❒ Diversity ❒ Visibility ❒ Conclusion
Public view of P-P peerings à Peering links at IXP: > 50K à ~40K peerings are publicly known so far
Visibility of IXP peerings
Potential visibility of IXP traffic
Network map 2012+ Google, Akamai,
RapidShare, …
Source: Arbor Networks 2009
à Even more flattening of the AS topology à IXPs central component à Lots of local peering
IXP
Outline
❒ Motivation ❒ IXP ecosystem ❒ Visibility ❒ Diversity ❒ Conclusion
Summary
❒ Revisiting mental model of the Internet ❒ Much more P-P peerings out there:
❍ A single IXP with 300+ members more than doubles known P-P peerings
❒ Poor visibility of IXP peerings and traffic ❒ IXP has a rich ecosystem:
❍ Members ❍ Traffic ❍ Geography