[mat-wg] Jedi feedback (Was: color blindness and color meaning association)

Hi emile,

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 04:36:03PM +0200, Emile Aben wrote:
> Thanks for your detailed feedback. We'll take that into account in
> further developments around the tool. Remember this is a prototype
> (code is available at: https://github.com/emileaben/ixp-country-jedi
> ). If you have a colour scheme that you think would work better for
> all cases, you can submit a pull request there. Or we can work
> together on improving this in a mini-code-sprint sometime soon?

I would love to, but as it stands I can barely dress myself without
picking conflicting colors and causing a scene. ;-) I recommend we look
for someone (professional or hobbyist) who have more affinity and
experience with composing color palettes.

> Couloring IXPs as green was done because this tool was initially
> developed in an IXP context; it was presented at EURO-IX and Netnod
> meetings, and my understanding was that the IXPs would favour paths
> going over the IXP.

"IXPs would favor paths going over the IXP" - who would've thought! :-)

> I think you are correct in pointing out that this is not necessarily
> the right thing to do in all contexts.

Yes, there will always be challenges in presenting the data in a fair
and useful way. In a country with a incumbent monopoly, the incumbent
might argue that they are the real internet exchange and that nothing is
the matter.

If we want to use the tool to further the development of Internet in
underserved regions, I think it is important to establish a primary data
visualisation goal: "is local traffic locally exchanged?" - then as
secondary goals we can perhaps highlight _how_ traffic is exchanged:

    - is there an intermediate ASN between src and dst? (that might
      warrant a separate color)
    - is an IXP used? (that might warrant a symbol on the field in the
      matrix)
    - if traffic leaves the country, what happens? Is it exchanged in a
      foreign country, but ASNs who are also present in the country
      being measured? (a firm warning might be in order for that one)
    - if traffic leaves the country, how many ASNs are crossed, is an
      IXP used, and is the IXP used by the receiving or sending party?
    - is the source ASN or the destination ASN present in multiple
      countries?

There are quite some dimensions, some of which are trivial to observe
(lookup a traceroute IP hop in PeeringDB) and some will require
correlation with other data sources such as latency triangulation or BGP
views.

To me the primary question "is local kept local? is most interesting,
and its less relevant whether this happens through a shared layer-2
fabric or direct cross-connects. While an IXP is usually very easy to
observe in a traceroute: it is actually one of the less interesting
datapoints. IXPs are just one tool in the toolbox, and depending on a
number of factors they are an economically sound utility or not. 

If Jedi can be transformed into a tool to facility with research/reports
such as done here https://www.linux.it/~md/text/peering-italy2014.pdf
that is where a lot of value can be gleaned.

> There is already work underway to look at direct vs. indirect
> interconnections in the tool. Our research intern Petros Gkigkis is
> going to show a sneak preview of that at the upcoming GRNOG meeting (
> https://www.grnog.gr/?lang=en ) this Friday.
> 
> And of course there will be RIPE Labs articles about further
> developments like this. So keep an eye out at https://labs.ripe.net :)

Cheers, will do!

Kind regards,

Job