Reverse Engineering IXP Peering via Packet Tracing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for analyzing Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) and peering relationships among Autonomous Systems (ASes) are incomplete and inaccurate, missing vital information due to reliance on outdated voluntary data and limited vantage points, which hinders understanding of traffic patterns and IXP evolution.
Innovation Solution
A method involving the identification of packet tracing servers within or adjacent Autonomous Systems (ASes) to perform traceroutes and determine peering relationships, utilizing databases like PCH and PeeringDB, and expanding vantage points by selecting ASes with better connectivity to trace packets through IXPs, ensuring comprehensive data collection.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Measurement precision
If traditional traceroute tools are used with limited vantage points, then the complexity of data collection is reduced, but the completeness and accuracy of IXP member identification deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the data collection process by distributing traceroute operations across multiple independent vantage points located in different Autonomous Systems. Each vantage point independently collects routing information, and the results are aggregated to identify IXP members. This segmentation allows comprehensive coverage without requiring a single complex centralized system.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent uses standard traceroute tools with multiple functions: identifying routing paths, detecting IXP presence, and extracting member information. By making the traceroute tool multi-functional, the system achieves comprehensive data collection without introducing specialized complex equipment.
2Loss of information
If vantage points are expanded to cover all members at all IXPs, then the completeness of member identification improves, but the loss of time and resources increases
Solution Approach 1:
The patent performs preliminary actions by selecting vantage points strategically before data collection begins. By pre-identifying optimal vantage points that provide maximum coverage, the system reduces the time needed during actual data collection while ensuring complete member identification.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent uses multiple copies of the same traceroute tool distributed across different vantage points simultaneously collecting data. This parallel copying approach achieves comprehensive coverage much faster than sequential collection, reducing total data collection time while maintaining completeness.
3Ease of operation
If voluntary information from the Internet is used to obtain IXP member lists, then the ease of data acquisition improves, but the reliability and currency of the information deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent employs IXP members themselves as data sources by utilizing their publicly advertised IP addresses and routing information. The members effectively provide their own identification data through standard Internet routing protocols, eliminating the need for manual verification while ensuring accuracy.
Solution Approach 2:
The system uses feedback from actual traceroute results to verify and update member lists. By continuously monitoring routing paths and comparing expected versus actual routes through IXPs, the system maintains reliable, up-to-date member information automatically.
Data Source
AI summary
A technique for examining the relationships of autonomous systems (ASes) participating in an Internet Exchange Point (IXP) utilizes packet tracing servers proximate the IXPs. Where such packet tracing servers cannot be found in the participating ASes, the methodology identifies additional vantage points by looking at a list of ASes that are one hop away from the ASes at the IXP. The choice of one-hop away ASes is made judiciously by picking ones that have better connectivity, based on past-data. Plural-hop ASes may also be used where necessary.