-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Draft of article based on discussions about TCP Info data and caveats analyzing it #9
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
f277076
0d1bdbb
f4a288e
5871db1
f58ff43
b953e11
7c4a0cc
fd76b9d
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,212 @@ | ||
| --- | ||
| title: "Analyzing TCP INFO Snapshots: Data Characteristics and Research Patterns" | ||
| description: A practical guide to M-Lab's TCP INFO snapshot data in BigQuery — how snapshots are collected and thinned, why most rows are noise, how to filter to real tests, and how to use RTT variance data to study latency-sensitive applications like VoIP. | ||
| tags: [research, data-access] | ||
| difficulty: intermediate | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| M-Lab's TCP INFO sidecar records a time series of kernel TCP socket statistics for every connection on the platform. The BigQuery table is large, heterogeneous, and counterintuitive until you understand how collection and storage work. This article explains the mechanics, the quirks, and the correct patterns for research use. | ||
|
|
||
| See [TCP INFO — M-Lab Core Service](../core-service-tcp-info) for a general reference on what fields the table contains. | ||
|
|
||
| ## How Snapshot Collection Works | ||
|
|
||
| The `tcp-info` sidecar runs on every M-Lab server, polling the Linux kernel's `INET_DIAG` netlink interface to read the `tcp_info` struct for every active TCP connection on the host. This is a passive sidecar — it generates no traffic and does not interfere with measurements. | ||
|
|
||
| **Collection cadence.** The sidecar targets a 10 ms poll interval, but each poll must complete a full kernel TCP table dump before the next tick. The dump walks the kernel's established-connections hash table, which is sized at boot proportional to available RAM. On small 4-core / 4 GB nodes the dump takes ~0.8 ms, so the 10 ms target is easily met. On large 32-core / 67 GB nodes — including several sites such as `lga04`, `lga05`, `yyz04`, `mnl02`, and others — the dump takes ~13 ms, which causes the loop to slip to an effective ~25 ms interval. | ||
|
|
||
| **Thinning.** The ETL parser applies a 10× decimation at ingest: only 1 snapshot in 10 is written to BigQuery. This reduces storage costs and query scan size, but it means BigQuery snapshots are already spaced roughly **100–260 ms apart** depending on the site, not 10 ms. | ||
|
|
||
| | hardware class | host dump time | effective poll | BigQuery gap | | ||
| |---|---|---|---| | ||
| | 4-core / 4 GB | ~0.8 ms | ~10 ms | ~100 ms | | ||
| | 32-core / 67 GB (fast) | ~3.4 ms | ~10 ms | ~100 ms | | ||
| | 32-core / 67 GB (slow batch, e.g. LGA) | ~13 ms | ~25 ms | ~260 ms | | ||
| | 40–56 core | ~11 ms | ~25 ms | ~250+ ms | | ||
|
|
||
| For a 10-second NDT download test, a typical site stores about **94 snapshots** (one per ~110 ms). Sites in the slow-hardware batch store about **39 snapshots** per test (~259 ms apart). If you need the full 10 ms resolution it only exists in the raw `.zst` archives on GCS — not in BigQuery. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nit: either |
||
|
|
||
| <div class="callout callout--note"> | ||
| <span class="callout-icon">ℹ️</span> | ||
| <div class="callout-body">The per-site sparseness is not a malfunction. The fleet-wide ~10× gap is the ETL thinning; the additional ~2.6× at LGA-class sites is their slower INET_DIAG dump driven by hardware characteristics. Both are expected and stable.</div> | ||
| </div> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Why Most Rows Are Noise | ||
|
|
||
| The sidecar monitors the host's **entire TCP table**, not just connections from active tests. About **50% of rows** in `measurement-lab.ndt.tcpinfo` are probes, port scanners, health checks, bots, and aborted handshakes hitting the public NDT endpoint. These appear as 1–2 snapshot rows with tiny byte counts (~250 bytes, ~1 segment). | ||
|
|
||
| The remaining ~50% of rows are the real NDT connections — but those connections each produce 39–94 snapshots, so they account for essentially all snapshot volume even though they are a minority of distinct connection rows. | ||
|
|
||
| **Never query `tcpinfo` in isolation.** Row count does not equal test count, and aggregate statistics over the raw table are dominated by noise. Always join against a test result table. | ||
|
|
||
| ## The Correct Pattern: Join by UUID | ||
|
|
||
| Every completed NDT test has a UUID (`id`) that appears in both `ndt.ndt7` (or `ndt.ndt5`) and `ndt.tcpinfo`. Joining on `id` and `date` keeps only connections tied to a real test result and discards all scanner/handshake noise. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is only true for the legacy platform. BYOS nodes don't run the tcp-info sidecar due to resource constraints (mostly CPU). Using
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In this kind of nuanced area, it would be fantastic if you could fix the prose to your liking. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This isn't a matter of prose preference. The sentence makes a factual claim that's incorrect, and the nuance is exactly why I'd like you, as the author, to make the fix. My comment has everything needed: tcp-info only runs on legacy-platform nodes, so BYOS tests never appear in ndt.tcpinfo; the claim just needs to be scoped accordingly. To be clear, I think PR reviews help us to converge on a shared understanding - this thread is a good example, and for a KB article, getting it right matters even more. But reviews work as a refinement step, not a starting point: especially with AI-generated drafts, the verification and understanding need to happen before the PR is opened. Review can catch errors, but it shouldn't be where the article's correctness gets established. |
||
|
|
||
| <!-- sqltest --> | ||
| ```sql | ||
| -- Join TCPinfo with NDT7 test results | ||
| SELECT | ||
| ndt7.id, | ||
| ndt7.date, | ||
| ndt7.a.MeanThroughputMbps, | ||
| ndt7.a.MinRTT, | ||
| ndt7.client.Geo.CountryCode AS client_country, | ||
| ndt7.server.Site AS server_site, | ||
| tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.BytesAcked, | ||
| tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.BytesRetrans, | ||
| tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.TotalRetrans, | ||
| tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.MinRTT AS tcpinfo_min_rtt_us, | ||
| tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.RTT AS tcpinfo_rtt_us, | ||
| tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.RTTVar AS tcpinfo_rttvar_us | ||
| FROM `measurement-lab.ndt.ndt7` AS ndt7 | ||
| JOIN `measurement-lab.ndt.tcpinfo` AS tcp | ||
| ON ndt7.id = tcp.id | ||
| AND ndt7.date = tcp.date | ||
| WHERE | ||
| ndt7.date = "2026-06-01" | ||
| AND ndt7.a.MeanThroughputMbps IS NOT NULL | ||
| ORDER BY ndt7.date DESC | ||
| LIMIT 10 | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| <div class="callout callout--warn"> | ||
| <span class="callout-icon">⚠️</span> | ||
| <div class="callout-body">Always filter by <code>DATE(ndt7.a.TestTime)</code> or <code>ndt7.date</code> to use partition pruning. Filtering by both <code>ndt7.date</code> and <code>tcp.date</code> in the JOIN is especially important — it prevents a full cross-partition scan on the tcpinfo table.</div> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This can only be Since forgetting the date filter is a very common mistake, it might be worth quoting the exact error text here so the users know what it means if they encounter it. |
||
| </div> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Snapshot Count Distribution | ||
|
|
||
| To understand the quality of TCPinfo data for a set of tests, it helps to look at the distribution of snapshot counts. Connections with only 1–2 snapshots are noise; completed NDT downloads typically have 10–100+ snapshots. | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- sqltest --> | ||
| ```sql | ||
| -- Snapshot count distribution for all tcpinfo rows (includes noise) | ||
| WITH snapshot_counts AS ( | ||
| SELECT | ||
| id, | ||
| ARRAY_LENGTH(raw.Snapshots) AS num_snapshots | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. These two queries scan over 300 GB each for a single day, and there is an implicit recommendation to run them to compare ("it helps to look at...") since this part is written as a tutorial, which will cause a pretty large cost for something that's essentially a sanity check. Changing the select like this makes the query read just ~4GB and gives the same results: |
||
| FROM `measurement-lab.ndt.tcpinfo` | ||
| WHERE | ||
| date = '2026-06-01' | ||
| AND client.Geo.CountryCode = 'US' | ||
| ) | ||
| SELECT | ||
| num_snapshots, | ||
| COUNT(*) AS num_connections, | ||
| ROUND(COUNT(*) * 100.0 / SUM(COUNT(*)) OVER (), 2) AS pct | ||
| FROM snapshot_counts | ||
| GROUP BY num_snapshots | ||
| ORDER BY num_snapshots | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- sqltest --> | ||
| ```sql | ||
| -- Snapshot count distribution for completed NDT7 tests only (noise removed) | ||
| WITH snapshot_counts AS ( | ||
| SELECT | ||
| tcp.id, | ||
| ARRAY_LENGTH(tcp.raw.Snapshots) AS num_snapshots | ||
| FROM `measurement-lab.ndt.ndt7` AS ndt7 | ||
| JOIN `measurement-lab.ndt.tcpinfo` AS tcp | ||
| ON ndt7.id = tcp.id | ||
| AND ndt7.date = tcp.date | ||
| WHERE | ||
| ndt7.date = '2026-06-01' | ||
| AND ndt7.a.MeanThroughputMbps IS NOT NULL | ||
| AND tcp.client.Geo.CountryCode = 'US' | ||
| ) | ||
| SELECT | ||
| num_snapshots, | ||
| COUNT(*) AS num_connections, | ||
| ROUND(COUNT(*) * 100.0 / SUM(COUNT(*)) OVER (), 2) AS pct | ||
| FROM snapshot_counts | ||
| GROUP BY num_snapshots | ||
| ORDER BY num_snapshots | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Comparing the two outputs makes the noise problem concrete: the first query will show a large fraction of 1–2 snapshot rows; the second (UUID-joined) query will show a clean distribution concentrated at 40–100 snapshots. | ||
|
jduckles marked this conversation as resolved.
|
||
|
|
||
| ## RTT, RTTVar, and Latency-Sensitive Applications | ||
|
|
||
| Each TCPinfo snapshot exposes three RTT fields from the kernel (values are in **microseconds**): | ||
|
|
||
| | Field | Description | | ||
| |---|---| | ||
| | `TCPInfo.MinRTT` | Minimum RTT observed since connection start — a proxy for propagation delay | | ||
| | `TCPInfo.RTT` | Kernel's smoothed RTT estimate (SRTT) at snapshot time | | ||
| | `TCPInfo.RTTVar` | Kernel's RTT variance estimate — a proxy for jitter | | ||
|
|
||
| `MinRTT` is the most reliable latency measure for research: it is less sensitive to transient congestion and queue buildup than SRTT. `RTTVar` captures variation in RTT across the connection and is useful as a jitter proxy for applications like VoIP and real-time video. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Use Case: VoIP and Voice Quality Estimation | ||
|
|
||
| There is active research interest in using M-Lab TCPinfo data to assess whether voice-over-IP on the public internet meets quality thresholds comparable to traditional landline service. Key questions include: | ||
|
|
||
| - What fraction of connections have 99th-percentile RTT below 100 ms? | ||
| - What is the distribution of RTT variance (jitter) across connections? | ||
| - Does quality differ between rural and urban areas, or by ISP? | ||
|
|
||
| TCPinfo's `RTTVar` field (kernel RTTVAR, in microseconds) provides a per-connection jitter estimate. Because multiple snapshots are available per connection, you can also compute rolling statistics across the snapshot array. | ||
|
|
||
| <div class="callout callout--note"> | ||
| <span class="callout-icon">ℹ️</span> | ||
| <div class="callout-body"><strong>Sampling density caveat.</strong> At most sites, BigQuery snapshots are ~110 ms apart; at LGA-class sites, ~260 ms apart. This is sufficient for characterizing latency distributions across many tests, but may be too coarse for sub-100 ms jitter analysis within a single connection. For sub-100 ms resolution, the full snapshot data is available in the raw <code>.zst</code> archives on GCS.</div> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. same nit: .tgz archives or .zst files |
||
| </div> | ||
|
|
||
| <!-- sqltest --> | ||
| ```sql | ||
| -- RTT and jitter summary for completed NDT7 downloads, by country | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There is no filter on downloads in this query, so it'll include both downloads and uploads.
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It is not clear to me from looking at the ndt7 schema what column we'd filter on to fix this. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. In While checking whether the KB already explains this, I noticed it doesn't, and that the same conflation exists in three published articles ( |
||
| SELECT | ||
| ndt7.client.Geo.CountryCode AS country, | ||
| ndt7.server.Site AS site, | ||
| COUNT(*) AS test_count, | ||
| ROUND(AVG(tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.MinRTT) / 1000, 2) AS avg_min_rtt_ms, | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Since this is a KB, I think it pays off to be a bit more precise than usual so our users don't learn bad habits from us! 🙂 This AVG does not exclude kernel sentinel values (e.g. This also highlights that @sermpezis you might find this interesting, too. |
||
| ROUND( | ||
| APPROX_QUANTILES(tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.RTT, 100)[OFFSET(95)] / 1000, | ||
| 2 | ||
| ) AS p95_rtt_ms, | ||
| ROUND(AVG(tcp.a.FinalSnapshot.TCPInfo.RTTVar) / 1000, 2) AS avg_rttvar_ms | ||
| FROM `measurement-lab.ndt.ndt7` AS ndt7 | ||
| JOIN `measurement-lab.ndt.tcpinfo` AS tcp | ||
| ON ndt7.id = tcp.id | ||
| AND ndt7.date = tcp.date | ||
| WHERE | ||
| ndt7.date = '2026-06-01' | ||
| AND ndt7.a.MeanThroughputMbps IS NOT NULL | ||
| GROUP BY country, site | ||
| HAVING test_count > 100 | ||
| ORDER BY avg_min_rtt_ms | ||
| LIMIT 50 | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| ## Site-Level Sparseness and What It Means for Analysis | ||
|
|
||
| When comparing results across M-Lab sites, be aware that snapshot density varies. Analyses that depend on within-connection time resolution (e.g., detecting short congestion events, estimating per-connection jitter from multiple snapshots) will have lower power at LGA-class sites than at small-hardware sites. | ||
|
|
||
| For most per-test aggregate analyses (mean RTT, final-snapshot statistics, throughput), the difference is immaterial — you still have 39–94 snapshots per test, which is plenty for stable estimates. | ||
|
|
||
| If you need to identify which sites are in the slow-hardware batch, you can compute the median within-connection snapshot gap from the `raw.Snapshots` array for a given date. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Raw Data on GCS | ||
|
|
||
| For analyses requiring the full 10 ms resolution, the complete unthinned snapshot archives are available in Google Cloud Storage: | ||
|
|
||
| ``` | ||
| gs://archive-measurement-lab/ndt/tcpinfo/YYYY/MM/DD/ | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| Each day's directory contains `.tgz` tarballs (one per server, per time window). Inside each tarball are per-connection files in `.jsonl.zst` format — one Zstandard-compressed JSONL file per TCP connection, holding that connection's full snapshot time series. To work with the data, download the tarball, extract it, then decompress individual connection files with `zstd -d` (or read them directly with a library that supports streaming Zstandard). | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| <!-- TODO: Add section on unnesting the raw.Snapshots array in BigQuery for within-connection time series analysis. --> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Same: either add the section as part of this PR, or create an issue instead of a TODO in a comment. (this applies to every other TODO in this file)
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. See #9 (comment) |
||
| <!-- FIXME: Verify that the RTT/RTTVar fields cited above match the current ndt.tcpinfo schema exactly — column paths may differ between the ndt.tcpinfo view and raw tables. --> | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I would expect the verification to happen before the KB article is posted. Could you please confirm that the TCPInfo schema matches?
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. See PR #10 for the approach that should handle schema validation - There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. My question was more like: have you run the query and, if so, can you confirm the fields match the schema? It feels strange to publish KB content that hasn't been verified, unless I'm misunderstanding what the The dry-run CI in #10 looks useful for testing queries going forward, but it isn't running on this PR yet. Also, that I think we should hold off on merging until the correctness of both has been verified (manually, if needed) — once that's done, the |
||
| <!-- TODO: Add worked example of computing per-connection jitter from the Snapshots array (UNNEST + window functions). --> | ||
|
|
||
| ## Further Reading | ||
|
|
||
| - [TCP INFO — M-Lab Core Service](../core-service-tcp-info) — field reference and architecture overview | ||
| - [NDT (Network Diagnostic Tool)](../test-ndt) — the primary test whose connections TCPinfo instruments | ||
| - [Getting Started with M-Lab Data in BigQuery](../getting-started-bigquery) — access setup and query basics | ||
| - [Analyzing M-Lab Data: A Researcher's Guide](../research-guide) — broader M-Lab research patterns | ||
| - [Beyond Speed: Understanding Internet Quality Metrics](../internet-quality-beyond-speed) — context on latency and jitter as quality dimensions | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is correct — it uses
INET_DIAG. I wanted to note that there is another article in this KB that says (incorrectly) that tcp-info usesgetsockopt(TCP_INFO). I think it would be worth creating an issue to fix it?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Issue filed - #14
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks! Since this repository deploys to a public URL, branch protection on
mainnow requires an approving review, so errors are more likely to be caught before publication in the future.