Keynote/Boardwatch Internet Backbone Index A better test!!!

Personally, flaws or not, I welcome Boardwatch's attempts
to come up with a widely-published metric for the
Internet. This likely will lead other publications into
similar investigations, some of which may well bring the
writers and editors of various periodicals into contact
with the folks at CAIDA.

I agree that it is important that good, scientifically-sound metrics be
widely-published. I hope that all such publicity in the future will
make reference to the work of CAIDA. From the information available
thus far (to me at least), this metric does not appear to be
scientifically-sound and the publicity does not reference the work of CAIDA.

Also, flaws or not, Boardwatch did do something
fantastically clever, and that's examining things on an
end-to-end basis, rather than obsessing about details of
what's going on between the endpoints. People concerned
about the abysmal end-to-end throughput of even modern TCP
across much of the present Internet should be rejoicing
and helping other journalists develop better and more
scientific approaches to categorizing expected versus
observed end-to-end performance.

I agree that end-to-end measurement is important. As I am certain
you are aware, there is work being done to build useful,
scientifically-sound ways of measuring end-to-end performance in which
the various factors affecting such performance can be described. This will
help everyone involved (consumers, engineers and marketers) more
effectively understand performance. The Keynote technique does little
to break-down these factors. As others have pointed out, this is one
of its key flaws.