` MN504 - Networked Applications T1-2016 (short) Assignment One: Assignment One (Individual Assignment with group work component) Submission Due in Week8 Total Marks = 20 marks (15%) Purpose of the assessment: This assignment, detailed below, is designed to develop students' deeper analytical understanding of different distributed network conditions, and the purpose includes, but are not limited to, presenting their understanding to a wide range of technical and non-technical audience. This exercise will provide opportunity to learn underlying inherent mechanism of networked application protocols. It has scope to do comparative study between different network conditions to ensure load balancing and QoS. This exercise provides them with the opportunity to demonstrate analytical ability of evaluating distributed systems performance, Quality of Service and service management. Submission guidelines: 1. Your report should include the following: • A cover page, identifying student (name and number), teaching staff, and assignment. • The assignment must use 12 point font size minimum and at least single line spacing with appropriate section headings. • Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list(Follow IEEE). • It should follow standard of academic report guidelines. • The written report should between 5-6 pages in length including findings. 2. Assignment will be marked on Moodle. Students must submit on Moodle within the deadline. Assignment Overview and General instruction of Assignment: You lecturer will allocate a protocol to you from Table 1 on random selection basis. Download the wireshark trace file from given Hyperlink for the allocated protocol and use Wireshark to analyse the trace for QoS and overall performance. Prepare a report which should address the following: • How the protocol works, including its strengths and weaknesses. • Analysis of the traffic in the trace, using the appropriate features in Wireshark to identify level of QoS and overall performance of the protocol in given traces. • The student need to also pair with another student who is working on the same group and compare between each other's trace to identify best and worst performance in terms of QoS and overall performance. Table 1: Protocol details and tracefile download link Group Protocol name Trace name Hyperlink to download Details I - Peer-to-peer IRC SkypeIRC.cap http://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#General_.2F_Unsorted Some Skype, IRC and DNS traffic BitTorrent BitTorrent.Transfer1.cap http://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#Peer-to-peer_protocols Here's a capture with a few BitTorrent packets; it contains some small packets I got whilst downloading something on BitTorrent. BitTorrent BITTORRENT.pcap http://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#Peer-to-peer_protocols Capture file of two torrent clients communicating without DHT or peer exch. II - NFS Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) ldap-controls-dirsync-01.cap http://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#Lightweight_Directory_Access_Protocol_.28LDAP.29 Sample LDAP PDU with DIRSYNC CONTROLS NFS Protocol Family nfs_bad_stalls.cap http://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#NFS_Protocol_Family An NFS capture containing long stalls (about 38ms) in the middle of the responses to many read requests. This is useful for seeing the staircase effect in TCP Time Sequence Analysis. Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP) ldap-krb5-sign-seal-01.cap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#Lightweight_Directory_Access_Protocol_.28LDAP.29 Sample GSSAPI-KRB5 signed and sealed LDAP PDU Table 1, Continued… Group Protocol name Trace name Hyperlink to download Details III. Streaming protocols Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) sctp-www.cap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#Stream_Control_Transmission_Protocol_.28SCTP.29 Chunks that carry HTTP messages between Apache2 HTTP Server and Mozilla. Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) sctp-addip.cap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures?action=fullsearch&context=180&value=cloud&titlesearch=Titles#Stream_Control_Transmission_Protocol_.28SCTP.29 Sample SCTP ASCONF/ASCONF-ACK Chunks that perform Vertical Handover. IV. SIP and RTP SIP and RTP SIP_CALL_RTP_G711.pcap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#SIP_and_RTP Sample SIP call with RTP in G711 SIP and RTP MagicJack+ short test call.pcap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#SIP_and_RTP A complete telephone call example V. Networking protocols BGP bmp.pcap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#Routing_Protocols BGP Monitoring Protocol, including Init, Peer Up, Route Monitoring Network News Transfer Protocol (NNTP) nntp.pcap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures#Network_News_Transfer_Protocol_.28NNTP.29 A capture of the NNTP protocol (a KNode client retrieving few messages from two groups on a Leafnode server). Network Time Protocol MicrosoftNTP.cap https://wiki.wireshark.org/SampleCaptures?action=fullsearch&context=180&value=cloud&titlesearch=Titles#Network_Time_Protocol (Microsoft Network Monitor) 2 Packets containing a synchronisation to the Microsoft NTP server. Marking criteria: Marks are allocated as follows: Section to be included in the report Description of the section Introduction A technical overview of the project Analyse the protocol in terms of QoS and overall network performance The significance of the project to given performance parameters. Appropriateness of finding Relate MN504 content and compare appropriate distributive system parameters. Comparison The student need to also pair with one of their friend who is working on a protocol from same group and compare to identify best and worst performance in terms of QoS and overall performance. Conclusion Draw conclusion of the report Reference style IEEE style Poor writing Inadequate structure, careless presentation, or the report exceeds the word limit by more or less than 10% Plagiarism Type of plagiarism - Copy from other student - Copy from internet source/textbook without acknowledgement. - Copy from other sources without acknowledgement. Demonstration only. Each student needs to be able to demonstrate the successful completion of their designated role and a set of tasks allocated to them. Extensions: Requests for an extension, accompanied by supporting documentation, must be received by the student in writing before 3 working days from the due date else penalties may apply for late submission without an approved extension. Special consideration form is available on Level 7 Reception. Penalties: Academic misconduct such as cheating and plagiarism may incur penalties ranging from a reduced result to program exclusion. Marking Rubric for Assignment: Total Marks20 Student Name: Student Id: Submission Due: …./…../2014 Date Submitted:.…/…/ 2014 Marker's Name: Mark Achieved: /20 Grade Mark HD 80-100% DI 70-79% CR 60-69% P 50-59% Fail <50% Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Introduction /1 Followed formal report standard perfectly and introduced the project clearly. Followed formal report standard and introduced the project Somehow followed standard and relate to the project. Some relevance. This is not relevant to the assignment project. Analyse the project. /5 Analyse is highly appropriate and highly justified in terms of given performance parameters. Analyse is appropriate and justified in terms of given performance parameters. Analyse is appropriate and partially justified in terms of given performance parameters. Analyse is appropriate and not justified in terms of given performance parameters. Analyse is not appropriate and not justified in terms of given performance parameters. Appropriateness of finding /6 Analysed and linked very well and integrated in the basis of given distributed system parameters. Analysed and linked well and integrated in the basis of given distributed system parameters. Analysed and linked and integrated in the basis of given distributed system parameters. Analysed and partially linked and integrated in the basis of given distributed system parameters. Not linked and not integrated in the basis of given distributed system parameters. Conclusion /2 Summarized well. Summarized Summarized but did not cover entire report. Some effort of summarization Not summarized Reference style /1 Clear styles with excellent source of references. Clear referencing style Generally good referencing style Sometimes clear referencing style Lacks consistency with many errors Comparison /5 Successful comparison and well understanding of the outcome. Successful comparison and understanding of the outcome. Partially compared and partially understanding of the outcome. Partially compared and did not understanding of the outcome. did not compare. Poor writing Inadequate structure, careless presentation, or the report exceeds the word limit by more or less than 10% -2 Plagiarism Type of plagiarism - Copy from other student - Copy from internet source/textbook - Copy from other sources -20