Consumers, regulators, and ISPs all use client-based "speed tests" to measure network performance, both in single-user settings and in aggregate. Two prevalent speed tests, Ookla's Speedtest and Measurement Lab's Network Diagnostic Test (NDT), are often used for similar purposes, despite having significant differences in both the test design and implementation and in the infrastructure used to conduct measurements. In this paper, we present a comparative evaluation of Ookla and NDT7 (the latest version of NDT), both in controlled and wide-area settings. Our goal is to characterize when, how much and under what circumstances these two speed tests differ, as well as what factors contribute to the differences. To study the effects of the test design, we conduct a series of controlled, in-lab experiments under a variety of network conditions and usage modes (TCP congestion control, native vs. browser client). Our results show that Ookla and NDT7 report similar speeds when the latency between the client and server is low, but that the tools diverge when path latency is high. To characterize the behavior of these tools in wide-area deployment, we collect more than 40,000 pairs of Ookla and NDT7 measurements across six months and 67 households, with a range of ISPs and speed tiers. Our analysis demonstrates various systemic issues, including high variability in NDT7 test results and systematically under-performing servers in the Ookla network.
翻译:消费者、监管者和ISP都使用基于客户的“ 速度测试” 来测量网络绩效, 无论是在单一用户环境中还是在总体情况下, 都使用基于客户的“ 速度测试 ” 来测量网络绩效。 两种普遍的速度测试,即Ookla的快速测试和测量实验室的网络诊断测试(NDT),经常用于类似的目的,尽管测试设计和实施以及用于测量的基础设施存在重大差异。 在本文中,我们对Ookla和NDT7(NDT最新版本的NDT)进行了比较评估,在受控和广域环境中都使用。 我们的目标是确定这两个速度测试在何时、多少和在何种情况下有所不同,以及哪些因素造成差异。 为了研究测试设计的效果,我们在各种网络条件和使用模式(TCP拥堵控制、本地与浏览器客户客户)下进行了一系列受控的实验室实验。 我们的结果表明,Ookla和NDT7 (NDT7) 用户与服务器的悬浮度值较低时, 工具在路径悬浮度较高时会与路径悬殊时有所不同。