pith. sign in

arxiv: 2411.00124 · v3 · submitted 2024-10-31 · 💻 cs.NI

Globalping: A Community-Driven, Open-Source Platform for Scalable, Real-Time Network Measurements

Berkay Kaplan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 17:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.NI
keywords open-source platformnetwork measurementspingtracerouteDNS lookupscommunity-drivenreal-time monitoringREST API
0
0 comments X

The pith

Globalping lets any user run ping, traceroute, and DNS lookups from a network of volunteer-hosted probes via a web interface or REST API.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents Globalping as an open-source platform that relies on probes hosted by community members to deliver global network measurement capabilities. It enables users of all technical levels to execute diagnostic commands from distributed locations without needing their own infrastructure. The platform includes a front-end for easy access and a REST API, plus integrations that support real-time use in collaboration tools. A reader would care if this model succeeds in making worldwide vantage points available to everyone at no cost beyond voluntary participation.

Core claim

Globalping is an open-source, community-driven platform for scalable, real-time global network measurements that democratizes access to network diagnostics by offering every user the ability to perform ping, traceroute, and DNS lookups from a globally distributed network of user-hosted probes using either the intuitive Globalping front-end or REST API, with official integrations to other platforms that enhance real-time monitoring and collaboration.

What carries the argument

The distributed network of user-hosted probes together with the front-end interface and REST API that route measurement requests to them.

If this is right

  • Non-technical users gain the ability to run diagnostics from multiple global locations.
  • Integrations allow real-time network checks directly inside collaboration and development tools.
  • Measurement capacity grows with community contributions instead of requiring dedicated servers or funding.
  • The approach provides an accessible alternative for continuous internet performance monitoring.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Widespread adoption could produce denser datasets on internet paths and latencies from diverse home and small-office locations.
  • The volunteer-probe model might extend to other measurement types such as bandwidth tests or latency to specific services.
  • If probe density increases, it could support more precise detection of regional network events or outages.

Load-bearing premise

Enough users will voluntarily host and maintain the probes to deliver global distribution and scalability without central control or paid infrastructure.

What would settle it

A sustained count of active probes below several hundred or heavy concentration in only a few geographic regions would show the platform cannot deliver the claimed worldwide coverage.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.00124 by Berkay Kaplan.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Globalping’s user interface (front end) dashboard. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Globalping’s workflow for executing measurements [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present Globalping, an open-source, community-driven platform for scalable, real-time global network measurements. It democratizes access to network diagnostics by offering every user, including non-technicals, technicals, and companies, the ability to perform ping, traceroute, and DNS lookups from a globally distributed network of user-hosted probes using either the intuitive Globalping front-end or REST API. Unlike solutions like RIPE Atlas, official integrations with other platforms, such as Slack and GitHub, make Globalping even more effective in real-time monitoring and collaboration.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents Globalping as an open-source, community-driven platform for real-time global network measurements. It claims to democratize access by enabling any user to run ping, traceroute, and DNS lookups from a globally distributed set of user-hosted probes, accessible via an intuitive web front-end or REST API, with official integrations to platforms such as Slack and GitHub that differentiate it from systems like RIPE Atlas.

Significance. A working implementation that achieves broad voluntary probe coverage could meaningfully lower barriers to global network diagnostics for non-expert users and enable new real-time monitoring workflows. The absence of any empirical data on probe deployment, geographic coverage, uptime, or measurement accuracy means the central scalability and democratization claims remain unevaluated and the practical significance cannot yet be assessed.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The central claims that Globalping provides 'a globally distributed network of user-hosted probes' and is 'scalable' rest on the assumption of sufficient voluntary participation, yet the manuscript supplies no quantitative evidence (probe totals, country coverage, active fraction, latency statistics, or uptime metrics) to support these assertions.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that Globalping is 'even more effective in real-time monitoring and collaboration' than RIPE Atlas due to Slack and GitHub integrations is asserted without any comparative evaluation, usage data, or case studies demonstrating improved effectiveness.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The phrasing 'non-technicals, technicals, and companies' is unclear; consider rephrasing for precision (e.g., 'non-technical users, technical users, and organizations').

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the detailed comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claims that Globalping provides 'a globally distributed network of user-hosted probes' and is 'scalable' rest on the assumption of sufficient voluntary participation, yet the manuscript supplies no quantitative evidence (probe totals, country coverage, active fraction, latency statistics, or uptime metrics) to support these assertions.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript provides no quantitative metrics on probe deployment, coverage, or performance to substantiate the claims of a globally distributed and scalable network. The paper focuses on the open-source architecture, API design, and community-driven model rather than an empirical evaluation. We will revise the abstract to qualify these statements (e.g., describing the platform as designed to enable such a network through voluntary contributions) and will add a brief section on current deployment status with any available preliminary metrics in the revised version. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that Globalping is 'even more effective in real-time monitoring and collaboration' than RIPE Atlas due to Slack and GitHub integrations is asserted without any comparative evaluation, usage data, or case studies demonstrating improved effectiveness.

    Authors: The assertion of superior effectiveness is not supported by comparative data or studies in the manuscript. We will revise the abstract to present the official Slack and GitHub integrations as distinguishing features that support real-time workflows, without claiming greater overall effectiveness relative to RIPE Atlas. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: platform description paper contains no derivations or self-referential claims

full rationale

The manuscript is a straightforward announcement of an open-source measurement platform. It contains no equations, fitted parameters, predictions, uniqueness theorems, or ansatzes. All claims are descriptive (architecture, integrations, community model) rather than derived from prior results within the paper. No load-bearing self-citations or reductions to inputs exist, so the derivation chain is empty and the work is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

No mathematical model, derivations, or empirical claims are present in the abstract; the ledger is empty as this is a system description paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5611 in / 1023 out tokens · 29084 ms · 2026-05-23T17:49:03.524654+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    RIPE Atlas and GlobalPing: Choosing the right network Measurement platform,

    Globalping, “RIPE Atlas and GlobalPing: Choosing the right network Measurement platform,” HackerNoon, Feb. 26, 2024. https://hackernoon.com/ripe-atlas-and-globalping-choosing-the-right- network-measurement-platform

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Ripe atlas: A global internet measurement network,

    Staff, RIPE Ncc, “Ripe atlas: A global internet measurement network,” Internet Protocol Journal, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 2–26, 2015

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    Comprehensive overview of the Per- FOPS platform,

    DigiCert, “Comprehensive overview of the Per- FOPS platform,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.digicert.com/content/dam/digicert/pdfs/perf-ops- overview.pdf

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Characterizing a Meta-CDN,

    O. Hohlfeld, J. R ¨uth, K. Wolsing, and T. Zimmermann, “Characterizing a Meta-CDN,” in Lecture notes in computer science, 2018, pp. 114–128. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-76481-8 9

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-76481-8 2018

  5. [5]

    KeyCDN Tools - Simplify problem resolution,

    “KeyCDN Tools - Simplify problem resolution,” KeyCDN. https://tools.keycdn.com/

    work page

  6. [6]

    Lessons learned from using the RIPE Atlas platform for measurement research,

    V . Bajpai, S. J. Eravuchira, and J. Sch ¨onw¨alder, “Lessons learned from using the RIPE Atlas platform for measurement research,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 35–42, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.1145/2805789.2805796

    work page doi:10.1145/2805789.2805796 2015

  7. [7]

    KeyCDN Tools - Analyze website speed and Performance - KeyCDN,

    “KeyCDN Tools - Analyze website speed and Performance - KeyCDN,” KeyCDN. https://www.keycdn.com/blog/keycdn-tools-analyze-website- speed

    work page

  8. [8]

    A programmable architecture for scalable and real-time network traffic measurements,

    F. Khan, L. Yuan, C.-N. Chuah, and S. Ghiasi, “A programmable architecture for scalable and real-time network traffic measurements,” Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems, pp. 109–118, Nov. 2008, doi: 10.1145/1477942.1477958

    work page doi:10.1145/1477942.1477958 2008

  9. [9]

    Performance impact of the EDNS Client Subnet Extension,

    V . ˇSletr and prof. Ing. Pavel Tvrd ´ık, CSc., “Performance impact of the EDNS Client Subnet Extension,” Bachelor’s thesis, Czech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of Information Technology, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://dspace.cvut.cz/bitstream/handle/10467/115552/F8-BP- 2024-Sletr-V ojtech-thesis.pdf?sequence=-1&isAllowed=y

    work page 2024

  10. [10]

    Data and measurements sponsorship,

    “Data and measurements sponsorship,” RIPE Network Coordination Center. https://www.ripe.net/analyse/data-and-measurements- sponsorship/

    work page

  11. [11]

    What is an autonomous system? — What are ASNs?,

    “What is an autonomous system? — What are ASNs?,” Cloudflare.com. Available: https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/network-layer/what-is- an-autonomous-system. [Accessed: Jan. 23, 2025]

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    Viger, B

    F. Viger, B. Augustin, X. Cuvellier, C. Magnien, M. Latapy, T. Friedman, and R. Teixeira, ”Detection, understanding, and prevention of tracer- oute measurement artifacts,” Computer Networks, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 998–1018, 2008

    work page 2008

  13. [13]

    V . K. Yadav, M. C. Trivedi, and B. M. Mehtre, ”DDA: an approach to handle DDoS (Ping Flood) attack,” in Proceedings of International Conference on ICT for Sustainable Development: ICT4SD 2015 V olume 1, Springer, 2016, pp. 11–23

    work page 2015

  14. [14]

    Gourley and B

    D. Gourley and B. Totty, HTTP: The Definitive Guide. Sebastopol, CA, USA: O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2002

    work page 2002

  15. [15]

    Tozzi, ”Content Delivery Networks Versus Edge Computing,” RTInsights, Mar

    C. Tozzi, ”Content Delivery Networks Versus Edge Computing,” RTInsights, Mar. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.rtinsights.com/content-delivery-networks-versus-edge- computing/

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    Nolan and D

    D. Nolan and D. T. Lang, ”HTTP Requests,” XML and Web Technolo- gies for Data Sciences with R, pp. 259–313, 2014

    work page 2014

  17. [17]

    DNS Design, ”What is DNS?” 2008

    work page 2008

  18. [18]

    A Comparative Analysis of Ookla Speedtest and Measurement Labs Network Diagnostic Test (NDT7),

    K. MacMillan, T. Mangla, J. Saxon, N. P. Marwell, and N. Feamster, “A Comparative Analysis of Ookla Speedtest and Measurement Labs Network Diagnostic Test (NDT7),” Proceedings of the ACM on mea- surement and analysis of computing systems, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–26, Feb. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3579448

    work page doi:10.1145/3579448 2023

  19. [19]

    DiagNet: towards a generic, Internet-scale root cause analysis solution,

    Lo ¨ıck Bonniot, C. Neumann, and Franc ¸ois Ta ¨ıani, “DiagNet: towards a generic, Internet-scale root cause analysis solution,” HAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), Apr. 2020

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    D. Kaur, B. Mohammed, and M. Kiran, ”NetGraf: A Collabora- tive Network Monitoring Stack for Network Experimental Testbeds,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2105.10326, Mar. 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.10326

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2105.10326 2021

  21. [21]

    Survey of modern fault diagnosis methods in networks,

    Z. Yang, Y . Wang, and Jiaguo Lv, “Survey of modern fault diagnosis methods in networks,” arXiv (Cornell University), May 2012, doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/icsai.2012.6223355

    work page doi:10.1109/icsai.2012.6223355 2012