[atlas] Proposal: Measure well-known CDNs,[CDN-HTTP]

On 17.12.22 03:00, Massimo Candela wrote:
> On 17/12/2022 00:19, Barry Raveendran Greene wrote:
>> On Dec 16, 2022, at 23:29, Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer at nic.fr> wrote:
>>> There is a larger problem here, a more strategic one: such a feature
>>> would contribute to the centralisation of the Internet, which is
>>> already too important. Tagging some targets are "important" and
>>> "worthy of measurements" would mean that we consider some HTTP servers
>>> to be more useful than others. That would be a bad message from RIPE.
>>
>> We’ve come full circle - we started with centralized PTTs - moved to a decentralized ASN/Paul Baran model - now Re-centralized based on marketing domination.
>>
>> +1 with Stephane’s observation. The selection of who to measure is a statement.
>
> +1
>
> Also, while the data would be useful, I don't think the role of the ripe ncc is to grade commercial services. Let other companies or individual researchers do that.
>

On the one hand i agree with Stephane, but on the other hand, it is a fact that there are a few large providers/CDNs who have a significant share... of specific webservices. I don't like that either, but i can't deny it either. I agree, that manually selecting those providers/CDNs for such a measurement could be understood as a statement. But maybe there's another way, to select which one of those providers/CDNs to measure? Instead of manually selecting them, there could be some sort of "threshold" which a provider/CDN has to reach, to be part of this kind of measurement. This way, it wouldn't be a statement, but a static delimitation. I am unsure what kind of threshold it could be, and how to detect it. It should probably be some sort of technical value.

BR,
Simon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ripe.net/ripe/mail/archives/ripe-atlas/attachments/20221220/ab401c81/attachment.html>