60 likes | 72 Views
This draft proposes improved principles and criteria for testing metric implementations against specifications to ensure compliance and performance under live network conditions. It also discusses the use of identical networking conditions and tunnel termination to compare and evaluate metric implementations.
E N D
Testing Standards Track MetricsDraft-geib-ippm-metrictest-02 Geib, Morton, Fardid IETF-77 March 2010 Geib/Morton/ Hasslinger/Fardid / draft-geib-metrictest-02
Draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-02.Improved comprehensibility and straightened concepts. Carol Davids provided an external review, Al Morton added an internal one. • Improved editorial quality and English. Added example statistics, a reference on the Anderson Darling K-sample algorithm and a glossary. • Completed suggested principles to compare a single metric implementation against the metric specification. • Completed suggested principles to improve metric specification before promotion to standard. • Removed discussion on statistics unless applied as part of Anderson Darling K-sample test. • Added a figure on the tunnel scenario to clarify how to compare metric implementations under identical network conditions. Geib/Morton/ Hasslinger/Fardid / draft-geib-metrictest-02
Tunnel termination1 Internet Tunnel termination2 Metric Implement. AInstance 1 Metric Implement. AInstance 2 Draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-02.Identical networking conditions for repeated measurements (logical). Metric implementations will be operated in real networks. Metric compliance should be tested under live network conditions too. Identical networking conditions for multiple flows can be reached by: • Setting up one or two tunnels to use an identical path for all measurement flows. • Simultaneously measure with 5 or more flows per implementation. • Ensure that the test set up doesn’t interfere with the metric measurement. Example: „repeating“ measurements under identical network conditions with a single implementation by measuring with two parallel flows. Geib/Morton/ Hasslinger/Fardid / draft-geib-metrictest-02
Draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-02Tunnels: Criteria and Possible Candidates • - must map packets of different interfaces onto the same tunnel, carrying an identical outer IP address/port for all packets. • - easily accessible/commodity implementation • - low operational overhead • - reliable • - low cost Candidates after an initial survey seem to be (ordered by best match to the above criteria): • - IP in IP (RFC2003) • - GRE • - Ethernet PW Geib/Morton/ Hasslinger/Fardid / draft-geib-metrictest-02
Draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-02.Identical networking conditions for repeated measurements (physical). Started to negotiate with a student to verify a metric test setup • Realise an IP “Generic Route Encapsulation” tunnel. • Utilise Ethertype 802.1Q (0x8100) transport to avoid local routing. • Execute Anderson Darling K-sample test for two instances of one implementation. Geib/Morton/ Hasslinger/Fardid / draft-geib-metrictest-02
Draft-geib-ippm-metrictest-02.Next steps. • Judging by the absent comments on the list, there’s no community interest in this draft (or it is felt to be perfect). • If this isn’t an obstacle, the authors ask to promote this draft to WG status. Geib/Morton/ Hasslinger/Fardid / draft-geib-metrictest-02