Comparing traffic classifiers
- 20 July 2007
- journal article
- Published by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) in ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
- Vol. 37 (3), 65-68
- https://doi.org/10.1145/1273445.1273454
Abstract
Many reputable research groups have published several interesting papers on traffic classification, proposing mechanisms of different nature. However, it is our opinion that this community should now find an objective and scientific way of comparing results coming out of different groups. We see at least two hurdles before this can happen. A major issue is that we need to find ways to share full-payload data sets, or, if that does not prove to be feasible, at least anonymized traces with complete application layer meta-data. A relatively minor issue refers to finding an agreement on which metric should be used to evaluate the performance of the classifiers. In this note we argue that these are two important issues that the community should address, and sketch a few solutions to foster the discussion on these topics.Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- Traffic classification through simple statistical fingerprintingACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 2007
- The devil and packet trace anonymizationACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 2006
- Early application identificationPublished by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) ,2006
- BLINCPublished by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) ,2005
- Internet traffic classification using bayesian analysis techniquesPublished by Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) ,2005
- Toward the Accurate Identification of Network ApplicationsLecture Notes in Computer Science, 2005