1 / 11

Core Router Software Accelerated Life Testing

This proposal defines a model and terminology for accelerated life testing of core routers, enabling accurate benchmarking and evaluation of multiple protocols and features in operational network conditions. It also introduces simulated network instability for comprehensive testing. The draft outlines benchmarks, instability conditions, and manageability verification.

henriettadavis
Download Presentation

Core Router Software Accelerated Life Testing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proposal for new Working Group Item:Core Router Software Accelerated Life Testing(draft-poretsky-routersalt-term-00.txt) Authors: Scott Poretsky, Avici Systems Ray Piatt, Cable and Wireless Shankar Rao, Qwest Communications 55th IETF Meeting - Atlanta

  2. Motivation for Draft • Routers in an operational network do many things • simultaneously • network protocols • traffic forwarding • security policies • router management • Testing typically has been performed on individual features. • To accurately benchmark a router for deployment => • test that router in operational conditions with all deployed features. • Also Introduce simulated network instability at high rate

  3. Summary of Draft • Defines model and its terminology for Accelerated Life Testing of Core Routers. • Provides Terminology for • Configuring simulated network conditions • Accelerating network instability • Evaluating results

  4. Model

  5. Benefits of Draft • Evaluation of multiple protocols enabled simultaneously • as configured in deployed networks. • Assessment of System and Software Stability. • Determination that the router is still manageable. • Identification of Software Coding bugs: • Memory Leaks • Suboptimal CPU Utilization • Coding Logic when multiple protocols operational

  6. Benchmarks • Run-Time without Error • Run-Time without Control Plane Error • Run-Time without Data Plane Error • Run-Time without Management Plane Error • Run-Time without Security Plane Error • Minimum Available Memory • Maximum CPU Utilization

  7. Instability Conditions • Interface Shutdown Cycling Rate causing • Session Loss • Route Convergence • LSP Reroute • Route Flap Rate • LSP Reroute Rate • Intended Test Duration

  8. Manageability • Verify that router is still manageable with all protocols operational during instability: • SNMP • Telnet • FTP • SSH • Logging

  9. Issues • 1. White Box Tests - Minimum Available Memory and Maximum CPU Utilization are not externally observable • Impact to protocols and forwarding are externally observable • 2. Commercial test equipment is unable to do this today. • 3. Ability to close on parameters/protocols

  10. Planned Next Steps • Add Startup Conditions including rates of establishment. • Add Secure Management Protocols (such as RADIUS, TACACS) • Add IGP Flapping. • Add repeated convergence due to route changes (attributes, TLVs). Already cover repeated convergence due to link loss. • Add Scope Section • Remove White Box benchmarks - Minimum Available Memory and Maximum CPU Utilization

  11. Questions Is this work item of interest to the BMWG? • Realistic Test Scenario for a Single Router • Carrier feedback indicates this addresses current test needs. Is this work item appropriate for the BMWG? 1. Uniform model required to compare routers. 2. Common benchmarks needed to communicate results. 3. Fits BMWG charter. Propose BMWG accept this draft.

More Related