[atlas] VM probes (was Re: Feature request for IP record route feature in RIPE Atlas)

Pavel,

it appears that my information is out-dated. You are right one needs to
import them these days. I realise that this is awkward and expensive,
but it appears to be possible.

Maybe rather than wasting time on VMs we should consider a new type of
anchor which is more readily available everywhere than the Soekris.
Personally I would go in the direction of Ubiquity Edge Routers or
Mikrotik routers which I know for sure are available in Russia and also
widely available around the world. Do you have suggestions?

Daniel

On 10.11.15 10:49 , Pavel Odintsov wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> Awesome! Could you share where we could bought it? I will share this
> information with local community.
> 
> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 12:36 PM, Daniel Karrenberg
> <daniel.karrenberg at ripe.net> wrote:
>> At this time are 485 connected probes and two connected anchors in
>> Russia. As far as I know Soekris boxes can be bought in Russia.
>>
>> Daniel
>>
>> On 10.11.15 10:07 , Pavel Odintsov wrote:
>>> Hello, Community!
>>>
>>> I like idea about VM based Anchor's.
>>>
>>> For example in Russia we have so much companies who really want to
>>> host RIPE Anchor hosting but it's really hard due to so much
>>> bureaucracy for computer hardware import. It's really sophisticated
>>> and long task.
>>>
>>> VM based Anchors could help in this case. But they should be
>>> designated as "second-rate monitoring". So somebody who interested in
>>> monitoring over non-so-reliable-vm's could use they. Actually, this
>>> VM's should "mine" less points than full-size-Anchor.
>>>
>>> We could select some unified way to run VM's. I prefer VmWare because it's:
>>> 1) Free
>>> 2) Simple to deploy
>>> 3) Mature
>>> 4) Very simple VM deploy
>>>
>>> Xen, KVM are pretty too but they are based on non standard linux
>>> distributions and it could be a configuration issue. OpenVZ/Docker and
>>> LXC should be avoided because (actually I have so much experience with
>>> they and I'm not a technology hater) they are not offer dedicated
>>> service and not isolated perfectly from each other processes.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Gert Doering <gert at space.net> wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 09:33:01AM +0100, Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
>>>>> >From my personal, informal assessment I advise against supporting VMs. I
>>>>> recommend a thorough assessment of the data quality, the costs and the
>>>>> effects on RIPE Atlas as a whole before diving into soloutioneering.
>>>>
>>>> From experience running a recursive DNS on a VM platform,  I'd also speak
>>>> against supporting VMs.  Unpredictable load elsewhere on the same host
>>>> can (and does) lead to UDP/ICMP packet loss, which the "Atlas VM" won't
>>>> be able to differenciate from "something on the path is broken/lossy".
>>>>
>>>> Gert Doering
>>>>         -- NetMaster
>>>> --
>>>> have you enabled IPv6 on something today...?
>>>>
>>>> SpaceNet AG                        Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard
>>>> Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14          Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann
>>>> D-80807 Muenchen                   HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen)
>>>> Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444           USt-IdNr.: DE813185279
>>>
>>>
>>>
> 
> 
>