Member Assessment Survey – Summary of Results

Responses to Sub-survey on Network Performance

Approximately 25 respondents chose to complete the sub-survey on network performance.

A. End-to-end performance

Responses suggested only limited participation in the Internet2 End-to-End Performance Initiatives; additional questions helped us understand this better, as follows.

Respondents only somewhat agreed with the statement that “Our campus or organization’s end-to-end performance is limited by our ability to upgrade our campus/organization network or deploy advanced networking technologies” as shown in the following dashboard indicator:

To what extent do you agree with this statement? Our campus or organization’s end-to-end performance is limited by our ability to upgrade our campus/organization network or deploy advanced networking technologies.

		Response Percent	Response Total
Agree		20%	5
Somewhat Agree		32%	8
Neutral		8%	2
Somewhat Disagree		8%	2
Disagree		32%	8
Total Respondents			25
(skipped this question)			111

“Our campus or organization’s end-to-end performance is limited by our ability to upgrade

our campus/organization network or deploy advanced networking technologies”

20% agree; 32% somewhat agree

Those who agreed were invited to elaborate on this statement if they wished; responses suggested both resource limitations as a major cause.

To see all responses to this question, please click here.

B. Performance Measurement

More than half (52%) of the respondents indicated they do not need additional information about the performance of links between their campuses and Abilene, and more than half (60%) indicated they do not need additional information about the performance of links between their campuses and their GigaPoPs.

100% of respondents were aware that there are network performance measurement tools and statistics available on the Internet2 website, and 88% reported having used those tools and statistics.

There was also a reasonably high level of awareness of the specific network performance tools provided by Internet2, as shown in the following chart.

Are you familiar with the following network performance tools provided by Internet2?

Yes

No

Response Total

Bandwidth Test Controller (BWCTL)

50% (12)

50% (12)

24

Internet2 Detective Software

86% (19)

14% (3)

22

Network Diagnostic Tool (NDT)

50% (12)

50% (12)

24

One-Way Ping (OWAMP)

54% (13)

46% (11)

24

Total Respondents

24

(skipped this question)

112

The survey asked what one thing respondents would most like to know about the Abilene Network or traffic carried by Abilene; the few responses received are listed here:

• How much is peer-2-peer and how much is it being used for research related purposes?
• I would like to know more about the GigaPop performance and what we can do within our network to fully utilize the I2 pipe. A few links, or routers, seem to consistently report long round trip times. Such as: 198.32.8.76 to 198.32.8.83. Does Abilene react to such performance bottlenecks? How?
• If Abilene has standards for BGP announcements, I don't know where they are. It seems like there's lots of small announcements that should be aggregated.
• I would love to see bandwidth utilization on links by protocol/application.

C. Performance challenges

More than half the respondents (56%) reported they are aware of researchers on campus who are experiencing network performance challenges with their applications, but only 32% reported there have been particularly difficult problems recently, or ones that remain unsolved.

D. Internet2’s End-to-End Performance Initiative

92% of respondents indicated they are aware of Internet2’s End-to-End Performance Initiative, but only a third reported having been involved in any of the Initiative’s activities (working groups, projects, workshops).

However, those who have participated reported significant benefits:

If you have been involved in any of the Initiative’s activities (working groups, projects, workshops), has your involvement been profitable in terms of

Yes

No

Response Total

Increasing collaboration with others in your area of interest?

90% (9)

10% (1)

10

Reducing specific end-to-end problems or solution times?

70% (7)

30% (3)

10

Sparking dialogue on issues of importance to you?

78% (7)

22% (2)

9

Total Respondents

10

(skipped this question)

126

Click here to return to summary of survey results.