SLAC

1. PingER (Ping end-to-end ) at PERN2
This technical report outlines the project PingER and its deployment at various PERN POPs. The
most recent data collected from PingER nodes deployed at PERN2 POPs is also included.
4/30/2012

2. 1|Page
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................... 3
2. WORKING MECHANISM ........................................................................................................................ 3
3. INSTALLATION & CONFIGURATION....................................................................................................... 4
4. USES OF THE PINGER DATA................................................................................................................... 5
5. PINGER DEPLOYED AT PERN POPS ........................................................................................................ 5
6. RESULTS OF PINGER MONITORING AT PERN POPS .............................................................................. 7
7. REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................ 17

3. 2|Page
Table of Figures
Figure 1: PingER worldwide coverage (Google Map).................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: PingER Pakistan coverage (Google Map) ....................................................................................... 6
Figure 3: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Islamabad POP ............................................................. 7
Figure 4: Round Trip Time as monitored from Faisalabad POP .................................................................... 7
Figure 5: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Karachi ......................................................................... 8
Figure 6: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Lahore POP .................................................................. 8
Figure 7: Round Trip Time as monitored from Multan POP ......................................................................... 8
Figure 8: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Peshawar ..................................................................... 9
Figure 9: Round Trip Time as monitored from Hyderabad POP ................................................................... 9
Figure 10: Round Trip Time as monitored from Fatima Jinnah Women University POP.............................. 9
Figure 11: Round Trip Time as monitored from Quaid e Azam University POP ......................................... 10
Figure 12: Round Trip Time as monitored from College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan POP .......... 10
Figure 13: Round Trip Time as monitored from Karachi University POP .................................................... 10
Figure 14: Round Trip Time as monitored from Government College University POP .............................. 11
Figure 15: Round Trip Time as monitored from Punjab University POP .................................................... 11
Figure 16; Round Trip Time as monitored from Quetta POP ...................................................................... 11
Figure 17: Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Islamabad ......................................................................... 12
Figure 18 Packet Loss as monitored from Faisalabad POP ......................................................................... 12
Figure 19: Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Karachi ............................................................................. 13
Figure 20 Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Lahore ............................................................................... 13
Figure 21: Packet Loss as monitored from Multan POP ............................................................................. 13
Figure 22: Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Peshawar POP .................................................................. 14
Figure 23: Packet Loss as monitored from Hyderabad POP ....................................................................... 14
Figure 24: Packet Loss as monitored from Fatima Jinnah Women University POP .................................... 14
Figure 25: Packet Loss as monitored from Quaid e Azam University POP ................................................. 15
Figure 26: Packet Loss as monitored from College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan POP .................. 15
Figure 27: Packet Loss as monitored from Karachi University POP ............................................................ 15
Figure 28: Packet Loss as monitored from Government College University POP....................................... 16
Figure 29: Packet Loss as monitored from Punjab University POP............................................................. 16
Figure 30: Packet Loss as monitored from Quetta POP .............................................................................. 16

4. 3|Page
1. INTRODUCTION
The Internet End-to-end Performance Measurement (IEPM) group at the Stanford Linear
Accelerator Center (SLAC) initiated their project named PingER for network performance
monitoring. It is led by SLAC and development work is carried from NUST/SEECS, FNAL, and
ICTP/Trieste. Earlier, in 1995 it was for the High Energy Physics community. However, this
century it has more focus on measuring the Digital Divide from an Internet Performance
viewpoint. The project now involves measurements to over 700 sites in over 160 countries [1].
Figure 1: PingER worldwide coverage (Google Map)
The PingER infrastructure reflects the wide geographical spread of the collaborations, and
involves a large number of research & education networks and commercial networks.
2. WORKING MECHANISM
The framework of the PingER project is based on the PING (widely used for network
troubleshooting). A PING involves sending an Internet Control Messages Protocol (ICMP) echo
request to a specified remote node which responds with an ICMP echo reply.
PingER measures following Network Key Performance Indicators (KPI);
 Packet Loss
 Response Time (RTT)
 TCP Throughput

5. 4|Page
3. INSTALLATION & CONFIGURATION
Following are the installation requirements for PingER monitoring machines;
 Hardware: 500MHz or higher, RAM atleast 128MB, 2GB of disk space, 10/100Mbps NIC
should be quite adequate
 Operating System: LINUX having web service (example CENTOS)
 PingER machine must be registered domain name service (DNS).
 Uninterrupted power supply (UPS).
In addition, firewall of the machine should be enabled, ICMP echo and reply must not be
blocked, and ssh access should be enabled for remote access of the machine.
Configuration might be done by PingER representative on giving them remote access.
Configuration procedure is done in following two steps;
Step 1:
 On your machine download latest version of PingER from
http://pinger.seecs.edu.pk/install1.html
 To make the files,
type: tar xzf pinger-2.0.2.tar.gz
cdpinger-2.0.2
./configure
make test-prereqs
make
 Make install
 Make install_cron
 README file for full details.
Step2:
 Install ping_data.pl
 Install a Traceroute Server
 Get ping_data.pl and put it in the CGI directory for your HTTP server(often/usr/local/cgi-
bin or /usr/lib/cgi-bin)
 You may already have cgi-lib.pl in your CGI directory. If not, put it there now
 Make ping_data.pl and cgi-lib.pl executable
o chmod a+x ping_data.pl cgi-lib.pl
 Put traceroute.pl in your CGI directory (often /usr/local/cgi-bin or /usr/lib/cgi-bin)
 Make it execitable with the command

6. 5|Page
o Chmod a+x traceroute.pl
 Test it by loading the URL http://yourwebbrowser/cgi-bin/traceroute.pl
 Open file pinger.xml and do the following changes;
o <SrcName>dns name e.g pinger.seecs.edu.pk </SrcName>
o <HttpGetBin>Path where lynx installed </HttpGetBin>
Example for PingER machine installation and configuration can be found at [2]
4. USES OF THE PINGER DATA
The PingER monitored data from a site is used in many different ways. Some of them are as
follows;
1. Selecting Internet Service Provider. When someone buys a network connection, he/she
should be able to check if the quality of the connection is satisfactory. Using the PingER
data, one can check if they are getting what they are paying for in terms of link quality,
throughput etc.
2. Trouble Shooting Tool. PingER has been used to determine if a reported problem is
related to networks, identify the time at which the problem has started, decide whether
it is still occurring, and provide quantitative analysis for Internet Service Providers (ISPs).
3. Network Performance. The PingER data can be used to select universities from
developing countries for remote collaboration programs. By using PingER to measure
the Packet Loss and RTT, it is possible to provide expectations on the performance of
bulk data transfers, VOIP, video conferencing and other applications. In short, using
PingER monitored data one can determine how well any interactive applications might
work between various pairs of sites.
4. Digital Divide. The PingER monitored data is used to quantify the difference in
performance between developed and developing countries.
Some real-time examples of the use of PingER monitored data can be found [3].
5. PINGER DEPLOYED AT PERN POPS
PingER project is also monitoring Pakistan Education and Research Network (PERN). PingER has
deployed the monitoring system at PERN's 15 Point of Presence (POP's) nationwide to collect
the Network Key Performance Indicators (KPI).

7. 6|Page
Figure 2: PingER Pakistan coverage (Google Map)
PingER is deployed at following PERN2 POPs;
1. Higher Education Commission Islamabad
2. Air University Islamabad
3. Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad
4. Fatima Jinnah Women University Rawalpindi
5. Higher Education Commission Peshawar
6. Higher Education Commission Lahore
7. Govt. College University Lahore
8. Punjab University Lahore
9. Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan
10. University of Agriculture Faisalabad
11. Higher Education Commission Karachi
12. University of Karachi
13. College of Physician and Surgeon Pakistan Karachi
14. Sindh University Hyderabad
15. Baluchistan University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management
Sciences Quetta

8. 7|Page
6. RESULTS OF PINGER MONITORING AT PERN POPS
 RTT (Round Trip Time):
Round-trip time (RTT) depends on the distance between the sites plus the delay at each hop
along the path between the sites. RTT also depends on traffic load and congestion (packet size).
RTT Metrics Standard Values are given in table below:
RTT Excellent Good Acceptable Very Poor Bad
<62.5 >=62.5 & > =125 & >= 250 & >= 500
<125 <250 <500
RTT monitored from HEC ISB POP
60
milli-second
40
20
0
Figure 3: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Islamabad POP
RTT from UAF FSB POP
80
milli-second
60
40
20
0
Figure 4: Round Trip Time as monitored from Faisalabad POP

9. 8|Page
RTT monitored from HEC KHI POP
35
30
milli-second 25
20
15
10
5
0
Figure 5: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Karachi
RTT monitored from HEC LHR POP
150
milli-second
100
50
0
Figure 6: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Lahore POP
RTT monitored from BZU MTN POP
70
60
milli-second
50
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 7: Round Trip Time as monitored from Multan POP

10. 9|Page
RTT monitored from HEC PSH POP
60
50
milli-second 40
30
20
10
0
HEC FJWU QAU HEC GCU PU MTN FSB HEC CPSP UOK HYD QTA
ISB POP POP LHR POP POP POP POP KHI POP POP POP POP
POP POP POP
Figure 8: Round Trip Time as monitored from HEC Peshawar
RTT monitored from HYD POP
140
120
milli-second
100
80
60
40
20
0
Figure 9: Round Trip Time as monitored from Hyderabad POP
RTT monitored from FJWU POP
60
50
milli-second
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 10: Round Trip Time as monitored from Fatima Jinnah Women University POP

11. 10 | P a g e
RTT monitored from QAU POP
60
50
milli-second
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 11: Round Trip Time as monitored from Quaid e Azam University POP
RTT monitored from CPSP POP
50
milli-second
40
30
20
10
0
Figure 12: Round Trip Time as monitored from College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan POP
RTT monitored from KU POP
40
milli-second
30
20
10
0
Figure 13: Round Trip Time as monitored from Karachi University POP

12. 11 | P a g e
RTT monitored from GCU POP
150
milli-second
100
50
0
Figure 14: Round Trip Time as monitored from Government College University POP
RTT monitored from PU POP
160
140
milli-second
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Figure 15: Round Trip Time as monitored from Punjab University POP
RTT monitored from QTA POP
200
milli-second
150
100
50
0
HEC FJWU QAU HEC HEC GCU PU MTN FSB HEC CPSP UOK HYD
ISB POP POP PSH LHR POP POP POP POP KHI POP POP POP
POP POP POP POP
Figure 16; Round Trip Time as monitored from Quetta POP

13. 12 | P a g e
 Packet Loss:
Packet Loss Metrics Standard Values are given in table below:
Packet Loss Excellent Good Acceptable Very Poor Bad
<0.1% >=0.1% & < > =1% & < >= 5% & < >= 12%
1% 2.5% 12%
TCP connection fails when Packet losses greater that 10 %
Packet loss as monitored from HEC ISB POP
2.5
2
1.5
%
1
0.5
0
Figure 17: Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Islamabad
Packet loss as monitored from FSB POP
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
%
1.5
1
0.5
0
Figure 18 Packet Loss as monitored from Faisalabad POP

14. 13 | P a g e
Packet loss as monitored from HEC KHI POP
2.5
2
% 1.5
1
0.5
0
Figure 19: Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Karachi
Packet Loss as monitored from HEC LHR POP
2.5
2
1.5
%
1
0.5
0
Figure 20 Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Lahore
Packet loss as monitored from MTN POP
5
4
3
%
2
1
0
Figure 21: Packet Loss as monitored from Multan POP

15. 14 | P a g e
Packet loss as monitored from HEC PSH POP
4
3
2
%
1
0
Figure 22: Packet Loss as monitored from HEC Peshawar POP
Packet loss as monitored from HYD POP
2
1.5
1
%
0.5
0
Figure 23: Packet Loss as monitored from Hyderabad POP
Packet loss as monitored from FJWU POP
2.5
2
1.5
%
1
0.5
0
Figure 24: Packet Loss as monitored from Fatima Jinnah Women University POP

16. 15 | P a g e
Packet loss as monitored from QAU POP
3
2.5
2
1.5
%
1
0.5
0
Figure 25: Packet Loss as monitored from Quaid e Azam University POP
Packet loss as monitored from CPSP POP
2.5
2
1.5
%
1
0.5
0
Figure 26: Packet Loss as monitored from College of Physicians and Surgeons Pakistan POP
Packet loss as monitored from KU POP
2.5
2
1.5
%
1
0.5
0
Figure 27: Packet Loss as monitored from Karachi University POP

17. 16 | P a g e
Packet loss as monitored from GCU POP
2.5
2
% 1.5
1
0.5
0
Figure 28: Packet Loss as monitored from Government College University POP
Packet loss as monitored from PU POP
2.5
2
1.5
%
1
0.5
0
Figure 29: Packet Loss as monitored from Punjab University POP
Packet loss as monitored from QTA POP
2
1.5
1
%
0.5
0
Figure 30: Packet Loss as monitored from Quetta POP

18. 17 | P a g e
7. REFERENCES
[1] PingER official website http://www-iepm.slac.stanford.edu/pinger/
[2] PingER installation http://www-iepm.slac.stanford.edu/pinger/epinger-install.html
[3] PingER uses http://www-iepm.slac.stanford.edu/pinger/uses.html
[4] PingER monitored Data http://www-wanmon.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-wrap/pingtable.pl