The data kindof exists.  Servers have Physlocations which have addresses of 
some kind.  Their purpose is presently ambiguous as to if that should be used 
for physical address or mailing address.  Clearing that ambiguity and adding 
lat/long are nice to haves, but that’s really a TO enhancement rather than a TP 
one.  Additionally those physlocation lat/longs wouldn’t presently used in a 
meaningful way since all routing decisions are based on the cachegroup.  There 
are reasons that a cachegroup location might be skewed away from the 
physlocation or serve as an area aggregate.  Today you can suboptimally equate 
physlocation and cachegroup for routing/capacity purposes if desired, but that 
gets pretty far into micromanagement and capacity issues.  Analytics I’ve done 
in the past that were useful were to create convex hull polygons of the 
physlocations associated to a cachegroup and check that the areas were 
reasonable for the tiers as well as to ensure the cachegroup lat/long was 
contained within it or nearby to where it made sense.  That’s shown in the past 
where we’ve had physlocations set wrong on hosts due to ambiguous physlocation 
names.  Although that didn’t affect routing just RMA work.

Better visualization around parentage in general would be a definite win.  
Given how we’ve gone from a 1 or 2 tier CDN model with secondary parents and 
MSO to an N-tier model with additional dimensions of permutations around 
topologies as well as capabilities/requirements, as an SRE it’s much more 
difficult to know how traffic ideally should be flowing for diagnostic 
purposes.  That view doesn’t have to be geographic in nature though.  A 
graph/tree would suffice.  From a perspective of self-service though, all the 
topic around parentage is generally too complex for a non-ATC engineer and too 
powerful.  Better visualization around parentage I think benefits both user 
groups.

Jonathan G


From: Dave Neuman <neu...@apache.org>
Date: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 9:30 AM
To: dev@trafficcontrol.apache.org <dev@trafficcontrol.apache.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 2022-06-07 TC Working Group Agenda and Meeting Notes
>>   - Zach proposes/iss working on a geographic Topology builder using
Cache Group latitude/longitude to map them out

I would suggest incorporating the physical locations of the hosts as well.
Maybe as a drill down?  Cache groups can be as big as a whole country,
having the actual locations of the caches could be much more helpful.

Just my $.02

--Dave

On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 9:27 AM ocket 8888 <ocket8...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 1. Attendance
>     - Amy Wilson
>     - Zach Hoffman
>     - Stephen Hamrick
>     - Eric Holguin
>     - Srijeet Chatterjee
> 2. ML: Call for Traffic Portal Enhancements / New Features
>     - Zach proposes/iss working on a geographic Topology builder -
> using Cache Group latitude/longitude to map them out
>
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2022 at 9:20 AM Zach Hoffman <zrhoff...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Active mailing list threads:
> > • Call for Traffic Portal Enhancements / New Features <
> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.apache.org/thread/82g2cstsn0p5gf8b6b56og17owq1837j__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Bv6UqJctTu9oeZnjv-kUj-ZSFJgmN5_124arZmYjlcWFNNbKo9qjPArplelcEUXtPcErLkLAQWcazGhFGJmD$<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.apache.org/thread/82g2cstsn0p5gf8b6b56og17owq1837j__;!!CQl3mcHX2A!Bv6UqJctTu9oeZnjv-kUj-ZSFJgmN5_124arZmYjlcWFNNbKo9qjPArplelcEUXtPcErLkLAQWcazGhFGJmD$>
> >  >
>

Reply via email to