peeringdb accuracy research

Thu Jun 13 16:48:41 UTC 2013

My dear fellow networkers,

Good news everyone, 99% of the parsable data in PeeringDB is valid! :-)

Measuring this number would have been inpossible without all the submissions
to the research app. Thank you!

If you are interested in the details, please see these slides: 

	http://nanog.org/sites/default/files/wed.general.peeringdb.accuracy.snijders.14.pdf

Kind regards,

Job

On May 23, 2013, at 12:28 PM, Job Snijders <Job.Snijders at atrato.com> wrote:

> Dear fellow networkers,
> 
> I need your help!
> 
> For the good of PeeringDB I am researching the accuracy of the current PeeringDB
> data set. We plan to compare three sources of information: peeringdb itself,
> publicly available listings from IXP operators ... and the ultimate source of
> truth: user submitted information, e.g. your "show bgp sum".
> 
> Why? I'd rather trust 10 sightings in the wild than one entry in PeeringDB! :-)
> 
> What can you do?
> ----------------
> 
> We've created a webapp where you can copy + paste the output from your routers'
> show ip bgp sum / show bgp sum / show ipv6 bgp sum. The webapp extracts the ASN
> and remote IP for the sessions and store those after your confirmation. 
> 
> Go to the following URL and submit your BGP data now!
> 
>    https://research.peeringdb.com/ 
> 
> If you prefer, you can also submit the data in CSV format [2].
> 
> What data are we using, exactly?
> --------------------------------
> 
> Only the following tuples of information are used: 
> 
>    (remote_ASN, remote_IP)
> 
> All other data is purged from the data set: I don't care if you are even
> exchanging prefixes or how many, nor does it matter what your own ASN is. The 
> _only_ thing that matters is that you confirm that you have a BGP session up 
> and running with a certain remote IP and ASN. You can submit such confirmations
> by copying + pasting your routers' bgp summaries.
> 
> Please submit your BGP summaries from all your IXP facing routers!
> 
> So when will I hear back about this?
> ------------------------------------
> 
> I will present the findings at the upcoming NANOG meeting in New Orleans [1].
> Given that the NANOG meeting is approaching rapidly, I urge you to submit your
> data sooner rather than later. :-)
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Job Snijders
> 
> [1] - CSV format should be formatted like column 1: ASN, column 2: remote IP,
>    separated by a comma. example: "5580,195.69.144.229"
> [2] - http://www.nanog.org/meetings/abstract?id=2140
> 
> 
> 

-- 
AS5580 - Atrato IP Networks