Metrics and Monitoring Capabilities for Earth Science Data Systems ESDSWG Wilmington, Delaware October 20-22, 2009

Outline Core and Community Capabilities Network Flow Requirements and Monitoring Science Data Production and Distribution Transitioning from Community to Core

Core and Community Core –Data system elements needed to ensure processing, archival and distribution of data collected by EOS designated Earth science missions in a timely and usable manner Community –Data system elements developed and deployed largely outside the NASA core elements characterized by ‘evolvability’ and innovation with the potential to be integrated into the core

Metric and Monitoring Capability Comparison CapabilityCoreCommunity* Network Flow Requirements X Requirement Monitoring X Active Network Testing and Problem Resolution X Science Data Production XX Science Data Distribution XX Science Service Usage and Demographics XX * Limited Capabilities. Sometimes core/community overlap.

Network Flow Requirements Science data flow requirements are formulated to support nominal and reprocessing efforts. Science teams, processing and archival facilities, among others’, are responsible for requirement development. Requirements are stored in documents under configuration control. Requirements are constantly evaluated.

Network Monitoring Includes both passive and active network monitoring tools that gather network statistics, populate the information into a database, and provides tools to analyze the data to: –Assist in troubleshooting performance problems –Track utilization of network resources –Verify requirements against actual –Help forecast required upgrades

ENSIGHT DB Collector Passive performance data (utilization, CPU pct., NetFlow, etc.) provided to collector Passive monitoring information (graphics, statistics, HTML) pushed to secured web server Secured ENSIGHT Web Server Proxied Performance web-site (HTML) EBNet Data Center Limited access EBnet Engineering hosts Interactive Live-monitoring, Flow graphs and reports Passive Monitoring System Overview Proxy Web Server Data Center Data Center Data Center

SNMP Object Monitoring Similar to MRTG Data stored and available via SQL Web front-end permits control of collection and graphing

Examination of FTP transfers between two networks One hour time period examined Ex.: Used to troubleshoot slow FTPs, and exonerate network Custom Flow Graph

Network Flow load is tracked on local LAN TCPdump data is collected, extrapolated Graph indicates load on WAN, LAN caused by Network Flow Rarely more than 15K bits/ second for 4 routers Tracking NetFlow Impact on Network Resources

ENSIGHT Active Testing Overview End-to-end user level test –Little or no visibility into network internals Purposes –Assess whether networks as implemented meet EOS requirements –Assess whether existing networks can support intended applications –Resolve user complaints: Network problems -- or somewhere else?? Determine bottlenecks -- seek routing alternatives –Provide a basis for allocation of additional resources

ENSIGHT Users Active Testing: System Overview Secured ENSIGHT Web Server, and B/U database Test Destination 1 End-to-end iperf (or other) active network performance measurement Active performance measurement results (throughput, packet loss, etc.) provided to collector Periodic SCP fetch of external Active performance results Performance graphics provided to secured web server Performance web-site (HTML) Test Source 1 Test Source 30 Test Destination 80 oooooo oooooo ENSIGHT Active Collectors (Primary and B/U) ENSIGHT Database (primary) Security Perimeter

Integrated Charts The problem: Neither iperf nor MRTG alone is sufficient to characterize the performance of a circuit –MRTG will be low if users are idle –But Iperf results will appear low if competing with active user flows Solution: Add the iperf and MRTG measurements together. –But there are some difficulties Improved Solution: Add the iperf and applicable Flow data –Flow data can be obtained for small time periods –But still susceptible to interference

Production and Distribution Monitoring ESDIS Metric System (EMS) is used to track core components. MCT is used to track community projects (e.g. MEaSUREs)

EMS Overview Automated collection, lookup, QA and reporting Web based reporting interface Users

EMS Implementations OGPB TBD

FY08 Overview

FY08 Science Operations

FY08 Science Distribution *OBPG data taken from the Ocean Color web site

Distribution Trends *OBPG data taken from the Ocean Color web site

FY08 Science Data Users

FY08 Web Usage

MCT Overview Web form for capturing metrics from community projects. Projects manually enter data into form, typically monthly. Web-based reporting interface for Program sponsors, PIs and NASA Managers. Community recommends modifications to metric questions annually at the ESDSWG. Metrics 1. Number of Distinct Users 2. Characterization of Distinct Users Requesting Products and Information 3. Number of Products Provided 4. Number of Product Types Available 5. Volume of Data Distributed 6. Volume of Data Available 7. Delivery Time of Products to Users 8. Support for the SMD Science Focus Areas 9. Support for the SMD Applications of National Importance 10. Support for SMD Education Initiatives (when applicable) 11. Number of Services Provided 12. Number of Service Types Available 13. Project Defined Metric 1 - Optional

MCT Transition The Metric Collection Tool is being replaced. Why Change –Consolidate data, support and sustaining engineering. –Ensure archival of metrics. –Single metric reporting interface. When –Prototype now available. –Soliciting comments and testers. –Hope to have the tool available in January Help us name it ….

Transitioning Community to Core Some community projects datasets, tools and/or services may transition to core capabilities. Technical approaches to handle this transition (from a metrics perspective) are being implemented through the consolidation of metric gathering tools.

MCT Prototype Demo