Alidade: IP Geolocation without Active Probing

Geolocation systems generally fall into two categories. Commercial systems provide precomputed address-to-location mappings for all IP addresses. We refer to such systems as geolocation databases. Upon presenting a geolocation database with a target IP address, a location estimate is provided immediately. Almost all systems reported in the academic literature, on the other hand, employ active measurements, issuing probes to a target after it has been specified, but before estimating the location of the target. These systems use constraints derived from the measurements to improve the accuracy of their predictions. Both approaches have their advantages. The active measurement approach may be more accurate, while the geolocation database approach is not intrusive and can answer queries quickly, even when off-line. This paper presents Alidade, a geolocation database system that makes extensive use of available network measurement data, but does not issue any probes of its own, either before or after a target is presented. Like other geolocation databases, Alidade precomputes location estimates for all of IP space. Indeed, using the available constraints, Alidade computes a joint solution for all addresses. We demonstrate that Alidade is competitive with the best commercial systems – on their own terms – using six different ground-truth data sets. Alidade also provides stronger guarantees of correctness, and each of Alidade’s predictions consists of a geographical region in addition to a representative point.

[1]  Vasileios Giotsas,et al.  AS relationships, customer cones, and validation , 2013, Internet Measurement Conference.

[2]  Dana S. Richards,et al.  Statistical Geolocation of Internet Hosts , 2009, 2009 Proceedings of 18th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks.

[3]  Shanika Karunasekera,et al.  GeoWeight: internet host geolocation based on a probability model for latency measurements , 2010, ACSC.

[4]  Ratul Mahajan,et al.  Measuring ISP topologies with rocketfuel , 2002, TNET.

[5]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Geographic locality of IP prefixes , 2005, IMC '05.

[6]  Sándor Laki,et al.  Spotter: A model based active geolocation service , 2011, 2011 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM.

[7]  Helen J. Wang,et al.  Mining the Web and the Internet for Accurate IP Address Geolocations , 2009, IEEE INFOCOM 2009.

[8]  Donald R. Morrison,et al.  PATRICIA—Practical Algorithm To Retrieve Information Coded in Alphanumeric , 1968, J. ACM.

[9]  David G. Kirkpatrick,et al.  On the shape of a set of points in the plane , 1983, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[10]  David Wetherall,et al.  Towards IP geolocation using delay and topology measurements , 2006, IMC '06.

[11]  Aleksandar Kuzmanovic,et al.  Towards Street-Level Client-Independent IP Geolocation , 2011, NSDI.

[12]  David Lie,et al.  Dude, Where's That Ip? Circumventing Measurement-based Ip Geolocation , 2022 .

[13]  Emin Gün Sirer,et al.  Octant: A Comprehensive Framework for the Geolocalization of Internet Hosts , 2007, NSDI.

[14]  Serge Fdida,et al.  Constraint-Based Geolocation of Internet Hosts , 2004, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[15]  V. Padmanabhan,et al.  An investigation of geographic mapping techniques for internet hosts , 2001, SIGCOMM '01.

[16]  Hui Zhang,et al.  Towards global network positioning , 2001, IMW '01.

[17]  Nicole Caruso A Distributed System For Large-Scale Geolocalization Of Internet Hosts , 2011 .

[18]  Arun Venkataramani,et al.  iPlane: an information plane for distributed services , 2006, OSDI '06.

[19]  Emin Gün Sirer,et al.  Meridian: a lightweight network location service without virtual coordinates , 2005, SIGCOMM '05.

[20]  Xintong Wang,et al.  Vivaldi : A Decentralized Network Coordinate System , 2016 .

[21]  Bruce M. Maggs,et al.  Posit: a lightweight approach for IP geolocation , 2012, PERV.

[22]  Steve Uhlig,et al.  IP geolocation databases: unreliable? , 2011, CCRV.

[23]  Paul Barford,et al.  A Learning-Based Approach for IP Geolocation , 2010, PAM.