@knightInternetTopologyZoo2011
Title: [@knightInternetTopologyZoo2011] date: 2023-04-03 type: reference project: Memex3
tags:: Memex3, Zoo, network, ARPANET, agency, control, classification, organization
Reference¶
Knight, S, Nguyen, HX, Falkner, N, Bowden, R and Roughan, M. 2011 The Internet Topology Zoo. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 29(9): 1765–1775. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.2011.111002.
Summary & Key Take Aways¶
Simon Knight et Al.'s article shows a topological "internet zoo" demonstrating the inter-relatedness of over 200 networks. The article seeks to analyze the network structure for better understanding. The authors begins with a critical consideration of the definition of a "zoo" and how the collection of networks, although not animals, can be called a zoo if gardened appropriately (Knight, S et Al., 2011, 1765). The article explicitly states that the argument is not to "reflect the exact nature of the underlying network," but to "show the network that the company intended" (Knight, S et Al., 2011, 1765). As evidence and data was gathered from promotional data self published by the owner or manager of the network in question, it revealed something that normal measurements could not: "What was in the mind of the network engineer when the network was designed, rather than what was built to meet the realities of day-to-day operation" (Knight, S et Al., 2011, 1765). The three goals of the zoo is enumerated and explained: 1. to add to the scientific research of networks and accuracy of data; 2. to educate future network engineers; 3. to conserve historical networks examples like the ARPANET (Knight, S et Al., 2011, 1766). The article exhaustively offers a transparency description and exploration of the data and the implication of using the word "topology." It then explores the classification of the network zoo such as one would do with a zoo filled with animals. The introduction of "classification tags" is stated as being "easy to add new types without changing the existing classifications" which is beneficial for the constant expansion of the fluid network zoo (Knight, S et Al., 2011, 1769). The overall network zoo points to an interesting case of network hierarchy. This hierarchy is fluid with the constantly increasing size of networks. The author emphasizes that the map of data shows that "there are as many types of networks as there are network designers" (Knight, S et Al., 2011, 1773).
How does it relate to class?¶
This article goes to show how incredibly complex and fluid the internet has become since early networks like the ARPANET. It also points to a larger discourse of Agency in the creation of these networks by network engineers. It could be the intention of a network engineer to Control certain parts of the networks as they were building it which affects the larger topology of the internet's networks. The way the zoo is also classified reminds me of pre-computer ways of classification. The Organization_of_knowledge follows tags and keywords, but what is the implication of deciding what fits where? This article pictures the significance of the topographical change of human communications to a digital plane.