Router and interface naming convention survey
I am doing a survey to see what naming conventions are used for routers and router interfaces as part of a measurement study that I am conducting as a student at the University of Wisconsin Madison. If you are interested in participating please fill out my form at: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dE1OYmVGcjlxV1YtZjB1QmJ... I am aware that this issue has been discussed extensively on nanog (and other lists). The purpose of this survey is to see in a structured manner which networks use which conventions, and get an idea for how automated the process of PTR record generation is across different providers. I am happy to provide high level results from the survey to anyone that is interested. Thanks for any feedback! -Joe http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~jpchaba
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
participants (2)
-
Jennifer Rexford -
Joseph Chabarek