[dns-wg] WG comment on DNSMON changes
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] WG comment on DNSMON changes
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] WG comment on DNSMON changes
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Daniel Karrenberg
daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net
Tue Jun 3 10:08:39 CEST 2014
[RIPE NCC *Advisor* hat firmly on. Note this hat no longer bestows responsibility for the services under discussion] On 3.06.14 8:46 , Peter Koch wrote: > ... > As I said at the microphone in Warsaw, I think it would be a plus not only to > maintain the old data, but also some way to visualize it, so some trends over > the years can be looked up (literally, not only dug in the raw data) in comparison. > That does not imply running an unmaintained or unmaintainable system indefinitely, > neither does it postpone the shutdown date for said system. Getting the viz back > in some "reasonable" time would be great. Maintaining the old data available is easy and should be done. Continuing to visualise it will need resources out of a limited pool. It is up to the community to indicate relative priorities for the use of these resources. We use roadmaps http://roadmap.ripe.net/ to help with this. So I suggest to put this under "Requested" on the roadmap. Then we can discuss it in the context of other things we want to see. > > The other point I want to submit "in writing" is that I am not convinced by the > reasoning that led to giving up the two hour delay. The fact that "measurements > are public" or "anybody could set up their own measurements" neglects the very > value added by the (new) visualisation: not only is there an instant feedback > channel, but that channel is _the_ well reputed source. In 1980s' words: > the revolutionary army not only has a transmitter, but it has direct write > access to the 20:00 main news. > Doesn't give me sleepless nights, but I question the unilateral decision > based on that fatalistic reasoning. >From a distance I see four possibilities in order of increasing implementation cost: 1) Do nothing and visualise data in real time. 2) Add a blanket 2h delay to the dnsmon visualisation affecting all users. 3) Add a 2h delay to the dnsmon visualisation to all users that are not logged in as a RIPE NCC member. 4) Add a delay to publication of any RIPE Atlas measurement result in some form. In my humble opinion option 4 is unrealistic because of the complexities involved. If the community wants that it will add a lot of pain to current Atlas users and, more importantly, draw a lot of resources away from adding useful capabilities to RIPE Atlas. Option 2 makes dnsmon much less useful for operational folk to follow a "situation" in real time. I have found this capability invaluable several times in the past to judge the extent and impact of service deteriorations. I would not want to miss it. Therefore the real choice is between 1 and 3. I would be OK with 3 if that makes people like Peter sleep better. We just have to realise that the authorised group is rather large and therefore this is just a deterrent, a fig leaf if you will. If we agree that option 3 is what we want, let us put it on the roadmap too. Daniel [still wearing a hat without responsibility for this service]
- Previous message (by thread): [dns-wg] WG comment on DNSMON changes
- Next message (by thread): [dns-wg] WG comment on DNSMON changes
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
[ dns-wg Archives ]