next up previous
Next: long range Internet Up: post-NSFNET statistics collection Previous: ethical

utility of analysis: examples

There is no centralized control over all the providers in the Internet. The providers do not always coordinate their efforts with each other, and quite often are in competition with each other.

Despite all the diversity among the providers, the Internet-wide IP connectivity is realized via Internet-wide distributed routing, which involves multiple providers, and thus implies certain degree of cooperation and coordination. Therefore, there is a need to balance the providers' goals and objectives against the public interest of Internet-wide connectivity and subscribers' choices. Further work is needed to understand how to reach the balance.

Y. Rekhter, Routing in a multi-provider Internet, [8]

As the underlying network becomes commoditized, many in the community begin to focus on higher layer issues, such as the facilities, information, and opportunities for collaboration available on the network. In this context, facilities include supercomputers and workstations, information includes world wide web and gopher servers, and opportunities for collaboration include e-mail and multi-user domains (MUDs). One could think of these three categories as corresponding to three types of communication: machine-to-machine, people-to-machine, and people-to-people.

Within each category, multiple dimensions emerge:

As we build this higher layer infrastructure taking the lower layers increasingly for granted, the need for statistics collection and analysis is not diminished. On the contrary, it is even more critical to maintain close track of traffic growth and behavior in order secure the integrity of the network. In this section we highlight several examples of the benefits of traffic characterization to the higher layers that end users care about.





next up previous
Next: long range Internet Up: post-NSFNET statistics collection Previous: ethical



k claffy
Sat Apr 29 09:03:22 PDT 1995