Transcript bmwg - IETF

Benchmarking Methodology WG (bmwg)
73rd IETF – Minneapolis, MN USA
• Monday, November 17, 2008, 1300-1500
Afternoon Session I (Rochester)
• Chairs:
– Al Morton ([email protected])
• If you are not subscribed to the BMWG mailing
list and would like to be, put a BIG asterisk (*) by
your legibly-printed e-mail address when you
sign the blue attendance sheet, or go to
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
1
BMWG Agenda
(Any Bashing needed?)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Note-Taker(s), Jabber, IPR (Yellow Sheet), Blue Sheets
WG Status (Chair, 10 min)
IGP Dataplane Convergence Status (Poretsky, 20 min)
Protection Benchmarking (Poretsky, 20 min)
SIP Device Benchmarking (Poretsky, 20 min)
Milestones Status (Chair, 5 min)
Proposed Work (Chair, 40 min, or time remaining)
– IP Flow Info Accounting and Export Benchmarking (Claise for
Novak)
(not appearing this time):
– LDP Convergence (Asati)
– Wireless LAN Switches Alexander)
– Multicast VPN Scalability (Dry)
• AOB (???, 5 min)
2
Charter Text Extension
In addition to its current work plan, the BMWG is explicitly
tasked to develop benchmarks and methodologies for the
following technologies:
* MPLS Forwarding: Develop specific methods to
characterize the latency and forwarding performance of
MPLS devices, extending the fundamental
recommendations of RFC 1242 and RFC 2544 to this
networking technology.
* SIP Networking Devices: Develop new terminology and
methods to characterize the key performance aspects of
network devices using SIP, including the signaling plane
scale and service rates while considering load conditions on
both the signaling and media planes. This work will be
harmonized with related SIP performance metric definitions
prepared by the PMOL working group.
3
BMWG Activity
• AD/IESG Review
• <draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-16.txt> Rev I-Ds
• <draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-16.txt> Needed
• <draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-app-16.txt>
• WG Last Call
•
•
•
•
draft-ietf-bmwg-ipsec-meth-03.txt Rev I-Ds Needed
draft-ietf-bmwg-ipsec-term-10.txt Then another WGLC
<draft-ietf-bmwg-acc-bench-term-13.txt> Rev I-Ds Needed
<draft-ietf-bmwg-acc-bench-meth-09.txt> Then another WGLC
• I-Ds
• draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-term-05.txt Discussion Today, then
• draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-meth-04.txt WGLC ??
4
OLD ACTION ITEMS
• IPsec I-D announcements should be posted to the
IPsec mailing list.
• Post the LDP-convergence drafts to the MPLS
WG so that we wouldn't repeat Scott's experience
with the IGP drafts (*Authors* are asked to do this
when they are ready, since this isn't a bmwg work
item yet). Also, consider the LDP-IGP sync issue
(has not been fully addressed in the protocol dev
wgs).
• Regarding the non-SIP specific metrics in the
SIP draft, a possible resolution may be to be to
revise the names of the benchmarks to make them
SIP-specific (especially if they are anchored on
5
SIP protocol events).
BMWG Activity
• Candidates for Chartered I-Ds
– draft-poretsky-sip-bench-term-04.txt
<= Revised, consider 4WG
– draft-poretsky-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-02.txt <= ?? Expired ??
• Work Proposals.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
draft-karthik-bmwg-ldp-convergence-meth-02.txt <= Need IGP prog.
draft-eriksson-ldp-convergence-05.txt
<= Need IGP prog.
draft-alexander-bmwg-wlan-switch-term-01.txt <= Just expired
draft-alexander-bmwg-wlan-switch-meth-01.txt <= Need Readers
draft-vapiwala-bmwg-TE-convergence-motivation-01.txt <= Expired
draft-sdry-bmwg-mvpnscale-03.txt
<= Just expired
draft-salahuddin-bmwg-bfd-motivation-00.txt <= Expired
Draft-novak-bmwg-ipflow-meth-00.txt <= NEW!!!
• Expected I-Ds
– <draft-ietf-bmwg-bgpcmeth-00.txt>
6
BMWG Activity
• Expired BMWG I-Ds
–
–
–
–
<draft-ietf-bmwg-acc-bench-meth-ebgp-00.txt>,
<draft-ietf-bmwg-acc-bench-meth-opsec-00.txt>,
<draft-ietf-bmwg-benchres-method-00.txt> Pending term
<draft-ietf-bmwg-dsmmeth-02.txt>
• RFC Editor Queue
–
• New RFC:
–
• Charter Update
– none
• Supplementary BMWG Page
– See http://home.comcast.net/~acmacm/BMWG/
7
Standard “Paragraph” (intro/security)
Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to
technology characterization using controlled stimuli in a laboratory
environment, with dedicated address space and the constraints
specified in the sections above.
The benchmarking network topology will be an independent test setup
and MUST NOT be connected to devices that may forward the test
traffic into a production network, or misroute traffic to the test
management network.
Further, benchmarking is performed on a "black-box" basis, relying
solely on measurements observable external to the DUT/SUT.
Special capabilities SHOULD NOT exist in the DUT/SUT specifically for
benchmarking purposes. Any implications for network security arising
from the DUT/SUT SHOULD be identical in the lab and in production
networks.
8
Additional Standard Sections or
Paragraphs for BMWG memos?
• Scope (plus purpose and application)
– ALL RFCs really need this, and yet…
• Test Device Capabilities
– Starting to see some value for this in the IGP
Dataplane work
– Specific capabilities needed
– Areas where we challenge the Equip Vendors
• Others?
9
Current Milestones
• Sep 2008
• Sep 2008
IPsec Device Benchmarking Terminology to IESG Review
IPsec Device Benchmarking Methodology to IESG Review
• Dec 2008
• Dec 2008
• Dec 2008
Net Traffic Control Benchmarking Methodology to AD Review.
Router Accelerated Test Terminology to IESG Review
Router Accelerated Test Methodology to IESG Review
• Feb 2009
• Feb 2009
Terminology For Protection Benchmarking to AD Review
Methodology For Protection Benchmarking to AD Review
• Apr 2009
• Jun 2009
• Jun 2009
Methodology for MPLS Forwarding to AD Review
Terminology for SIP Device Benchmarking to IESG Review
Methodology for SIP Device Benchmarking to IESG Review
• Dec 2009
• Dec 2009
• Jul 2010
Router Accelerated Test Method for EBGP to IESG Review
Router Accelerated Test Method for Op Sec to IESG Review
Basic BGP Convergence Benchmarking Meth. to AD Review.
10
Work Proposal Summary Matrix
Work Area >
Criteria \/
Proposal
In Scope of
Charter?
(acm)
Draft(s)
Mcast
VPN
Scalability
Y
Y
1+
LDP
Converg
WLAN
switch
IPFIX
BFD
RSVPTE
Firewall
extension
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
No
Overlap
w/802.11
T
Y
Y
Y
Y
1+
Draft
gives
motivat.
Draft
gives
motivat.
?
Some
comments
Questions to
clarify
1+1
Sig. Support
at meetings
Yes, but also
some
objections
Sig. Support
on List
Many
12/2007
comments
Many
2/2008
comments
L3vpn spec
IGP prog
Dependencies
1+1
Some
comments
11